Talk:Community Breakfast July 2012 - Community management during massive change/@comment-108.233.44.183-20120724191023

Was so bummed to have missed this one, great notes Carter! Would like to know specifically what data is most important to collect during massive change, if that differs from the data we collect every day. What vertices in data streams are important to note during this time of flux, and what patterns are indicative of trouble brewing that we can be on the lookout for ahead of time? Looking backward at changes your communities have weathered, are there signs you can share that we can be looking for?

One of the serious challenges I faced when serving on a CM team was when the leadership of our all-women's community decided to admit as "special men". These were defined as cool, feminist, open "brothers, comrades & friends". They did not consult the membership, many of whom had suffered severe physical and sexual abuse from men - men just appeared in the forums one day, simultaneous with an explanation about the change. These were very nice men on the whole, but this move, without consulting or informing the membership prior to the change led to massive distrust and exodus of members by the dozens. We on the CM team were informed at the same time as the members, so felt set up and similarly betrayed. But we stayed and slugged it out for the sake of the members who were left.

First, the CM team held an open member-moot, talked to the members and shared our mutual feelings. We politely asked the men who had been added to the community to retire until the membership made a majority decision on their admission. Most did.

Second, the CM team confronted the leadership committee in an open meeting and shared our feelings and a few of the solutions our initial member-moot came up with.

Third, the leadership team split and two of the original founders quit.Three of the five original members plus the CM team and membership voted to dissolve the leadership team and reconstitute a new one, with three of our most vocal evangelist members and three CM's (I was one) participating collaboratively with the remaining three original leaders.

Fourth, we removed the remaining few male members who were still posting in the forums (not belligerently, most were truly bewildered by the proceedings) and apologized to them.

Fifth, we put the motion to have male members or not up to an all-member vote. Surprisingly, it passed, with very stringent set of criteria male members must meet to join and with their participation restricted to a set of mixed forums.

Sixth, we recruited a team of therapists among us (again, I was one) to formulate a coping strategies for the membership to help them through the transition period. Then and only then did we give the membership four weeks notice that as a result of the vote we would be admitting men to very limited areas under very specific criteria that they, the members had selected. Also, that we were opening support forums and other measures for those who needed them, and that members were invited to take greater responsibility for what happened in the community through our new member support and ombudsman programs.

For this community, this approach worked very well, and mostly diffused the panic and betrayal the members felt. Involving average members in the leadership team proved key to regaining the trust that was lost and see the membership into a new golden age.