From NVCWiki
Jump to: navigation, search

This area is for Public Discussion of the protected CNVC Board document drafting area. To comment on a specific item, click "article" above to return to the main Board page and click on the topic there that you wish to discuss. Each topic has a "Talk" area for public comment, which you access by clicking on "discussion" at the top of that page.

Feedback received from folks in the network

  • I am adding a thread here concerning feedback received from folks in the network about the proposal to move CNVC to Albuquerque.

Hello Jim,

My name is Martha Young and I am a former CNVC Board Member and trainer pursuing certification. I am also a management consultant who specializes in organizational effectiveness. When I was on the Board I argued that the CNVC office should be in a location which would meet the following criteria:

1. Near network of other organizations that work on peacemaking and conflict resolution so that we can collaborate

2. Near organizations that may give grants to NVC

3. In a large metropolitan area whose time zone would be more conducive to accomodating contact and connection with more of the world network.

4. In a country where there is already a critical mass of trainers

I suggest moving the headquarters to 1. Washington, DC, 2. London, 3. Berlin.

New Mexico does not seem to meet the criteria that I would consider important for a strategice move.

I wanted to let you know my opinion to meet needs for information from the network which I believe you are seeking from your email.

Martha Young

This is Jim's response:

I feel pleased to receive your feedback, grateful that you continue to express your care for the well-being of CNVC and our mission!

Although moving to NM may not meet the criteria you outline, i sense (and hope) that moving there will contribute to nudging CNVC towards fulfilling some of its needs.

Recently in Albuquerque, The Board and LT spent some time brainstorming some next steps beyond this initial next step to New Mexico. With you permission, I would like to include your feedback on the discussion area for the LT on our wiki. Would you have any objection to that?

I have also made a few responses below:



  • 1. Near network of other organizations that work on peacemaking and

conflict resolution so that we can collaborate

    • Several organizations like that have a presence in NM, including

Bread for the World, Stop the War Machine, the Los Alamos Study Group and others. New Mexico is also the state closest to having a Cabinet level Department of Peace and has a long and rich tradition of liberal politics. Conflict resolution skills permeate much of the educational infrastructure from Albuquerque Public Schools (APS) to the University of New Mexico, even Sandia and Los Alamos National Labs. NVC has a presence in both UNM and APS.

  • 2. Near organizations that may give grants to NVC
  • Again, there are some organizations in NM that we hope to collaborate

with, including Ted Turner (the largest land owner in NM and a peace activist), The Santa Fe Institute, the UNM Dept of Peace Studies, The National Labs, and some Foundations that have been supportive of peace and dialogue projects.

  • 3. In a large metropolitan area whose time zone would be more conducive to accomodating contact and connection with more of the

world network.

    • At least NM is one time zone closer to civilization than LA! NM is

also the "call center" capitol of the world and has a cornucopia of trained people hungry to offer such services 24/7. Also, Albuquerque has recently been selected as #1 by Forbes magazine as a place conducive to doing business.

  • 4. In a country where there is already a critical mass of trainers
    • The trainer base in the US is among the strongest, in my opinion.

And we still have a long way to go, since we do not yet have a trainer in every state. New Mexico is blessed with 5 certified trainers, plus Marshall and Valentina, with a half dozen registered candidates and a growing network of practice groups throughout the state.

  • I suggest moving the headquarters to 1. Washington, DC, 2. London,3. Berlin.
    • I would enjoy seeing regional offices in at least 6 zones within ten

years to match the circles being created by the GCC: English speaking-Western (North America, Western Europe); English Speaking Other (Eastern Europe); German, French, and Spanish/Portuguese; and Asia/Oceania.

    • i wonder how you feel now, reading the observations and opinions above?

Again, I feel so grateful for you contribution!



GCC Name Change Proposal

I am noticing that to my knowledge the whole NVC network does not have a name. Does GCC only represent itself or is it intended to represent the whole? -Jerry Koch-Gonzalez 6:30, 14 July 2006

My understanding is that a possible intent of the new emerging GCC is for it to represent everyone using NVC in the world who'd like to participate in a global organization. Since the GCC is still in an early formative stage, I don't believe any decisions about this have yet been made.

What name do you use for the whole network?

This too seems to be not decided. I have proposed to the Board/GCC that we change our name to Global Circle for NonViolent Communication (GCNVC). What I'd like to then see is for the CNVC office to retain that name and for the U.S. non-profit corporation CNVC to change its name to something indicative of its role. Perhaps a name like U.S. Circle for NonViolent Communication (USCNVC). The role of that corporation might then be to oversee U.S. nonprofit status to facilitate collecting funds from donors who seek tax deductions. The funds could then be passed along to GCNVC for allocation to projects, probably with some funds earmarked for specific projects or uses.

How about the International Network for Compassionate Communication? That would be consistent with some of the US regional networks. (is there an ongoing debate between using Compassionate Communication vs Nonviolent Communication?)

I prefer the name Compassionate Communication, but my impression is that it's already trademarked by another organization.

If the whole network had a name them you would not need to add anything to GCC. CNVC is the name of an organization. Its top circle is the Board of Directors (or BOD if we use initials). The GCC is a top circle. What is the name of the organization that it is a top circle of?

All of this organizational structure and name discussion seems to be very much in flux right now. I appreciate your interest and suggestions, because my sense is that we are moving toward an organization with more participation from the whole international NVC community.

--John W. 20:03, 14 July 2006 (CEST)

I'd heard that Compassionate Communication was a CNVC service mark (SM). Is that not accurate? I'd love to move your "impression" that somenone else holds the trademark. Who does? I tried some online trademark search and did not find anything. And what implications does that have for the various USA NVC groups that already have been putting that phrase into their regional organizational titles? From my perspective the name that GCC chooses for itself or the network will have implications for everyone else if we are to have some standard recognizability across regions. So, yes I still like my suggestion(International Network for Compassionate Communication) and would like to know if it is legally ruled out. --Jerry Koch-Gonzalez 24 July 2006

Discussion of CNVC Board Area

Who? When?

It would be very useful to me - and i imagine to others - if the board members and the dates of future meetings were listed, on the CNVC Board page or somewhere else appropriate. John Wiley (or anyone who is part of the group editing these pages) would you be willing to add these? --John Abbe 19:09, 22 June 2006 (CEST)

The members are listed here, and I believe meeting info is currently posted to the FriendsOfNVC yahoo group a week or so before each month's conference call "meeting." I'm hoping that soon we'll be moving the yahoo groups to the new cnvc website now in development, and such a move would of course be announced there and probably also here on the wiki. -JW

Page names

I've noticed that you are using months without years, and in other ways very general names for some of the pages connected to the CNVC Board. This may become confusing as time goes by (imagine May or June next year, or a local group's board), and as there continue to be more groups using the wiki.

I appreciate your interest, and your suggestions because I'm hopeful that we can continue the trend toward increasing use of the wiki. At the same time, I notice some dislike for the long text strings in full dating. Also, I prefer editing manually with JavaScript off, so it would involve more typing. I like that wiki automatically dates changes, and am hopeful that might meet your needs for having things dated. Where I'm guessing a date could be helpful, I'm willing to insert a date manually like this: 6/26/06. Would that work well for you?

Here are some suggested name changes that might be clearer (you can change the name of any page by clicking on the "move" link at the top of any page):

Agenda Process -> CNVC Board Agenda Process

Board Policies -> CNVC Board Policies

Criteria For CEO Selection -> Criteria For CNVC CEO Selection

June Agenda -> CNVC Board June 2006 Meeting

Proposed May Agenda -> CNVC Board May 2006 Meeting

--John Abbe 07:18, 9 June 2006 (CEST)

I prefer short names for things, and would enjoy more clarity on what needs of yours would be met by using the longer names you suggest. Is it in case other pages someday link to these Board pages? My understanding is that right now only the Board section currently links to them, and that as our new website comes online we will at some point move this Board section to that site. Once there, I'm guessing we might edit and rearrange it.
Also, it looks likely that we'll soon be changing the name CNVC to something more indicative of the GCC process we've begun. Thus I'm reluctant to add the CNVC title as you've suggested.
In the hope that it might meet some of your needs, I've just moved the Board Meeting Agenda Process as you suggested, but without using CNVC.
I welcome further dialog with you about this. I deeply appreciate your many contributions to this site, to the upcoming Oakland conference, and to the global NVC community. -JW

Thanks. I understand that you want short names, and that is also a consideration for me when crafting page names. I also consider specificity, for the sake of clarity. Here are five scenarios in which the suggestions i've made are relevant (and i'm entirely open to other strategies for providing users with clarity). You offered one - other pages might link to board pages (1). Also, already the pages appear in the Recent Changes listing - anyone loooking there will not know that "Board Meeting Agenda Process" refers to the CNVC Board (2). No other boards are yet using the wiki, but they could begin at any time (3), and other groups are already using the wiki to develop agendas (4). Even if the CNVC Board is no longer using this wiki by the time another board does, i imagine that modeling sufficient specificity in page names is a valuable contribution generally (5). Does this help you to understand my needs?

I'm glad you've given this extra context. I'm getting more clarity on how naming is important in the evolutionary process of wiki building, having been more used to the structure of traditional websites and blogs. I see what you mean about how it will become more important as this wiki grows. Still, I'd like to wait another month because I'm hoping the "GCC/Board" will clarify the name. I'd prefer that to changing it again, or guessing at the consensus name and giving a misimpression that I'm attached to a particular outcome. Will it be comfortable for you to wait? -John W. 22:09, 18 July 2006 (CEST)

Page dates

As for dates, i want both clarity and inclusion. Americans and most of the rest of the world write months and day-of-month in different order - 6/26/06 vs. 26/6/06 - so, i'd still suggest June 26 2006 (or just June 2006 if it's a group that never meets more than once a month). The wiki dates changes, unfortunately that doesn't help someone who is only seeing the page name in the Recent Changes list, or in a link from another page. (I'm not clear about JavaScript's relevance, as i'm only referring to page names, not to dating our comments - which doesn't really matter to me much :). --John Abbe 01:23, 16 July 2006 (CEST)

I agree about the dates too, and have re-dated some of the pages. I'll re-date others when I re-name them, and invite everyone else to follow your suggestions too. It would be great if the wiki had an option to do this sort of chronological dating automatically, because I'm guessing that some people (certainly me) might forget sometimes.
In the hope it will make this dialog easier to read I've turned on my JavaScript just now to make it easier for me to sign this with my username and date. I can just click on the second-to-last icon on the toolbar at the top of this edit window, and it automatically inserts the --~~~~ code for my signature with timestamp. --John W. 22:09, 18 July 2006 (CEST)

Reaching millions of people through mainstream media outlets...

Thank you John for keeping us informed of what is happening in the LT ( Love Team ;-) ).

I don't know anybody better aware of both :

  • the beauty and efficiency of NVC, even within the CNVC ;-)
  • the beauty and efficiency of the copyleft attitude, as well in free-libre-open-source software (FLOSS), as in other creations like Wikipedia for example.

So that's why I'm asking it to you :

from Mexico, thank you again for sharing all this through this wiki, --Dieudonné 10:56, 1 November 2006 (CET)


I for one like the idea of using "viral marketing" to get the word out about NVC. Soon, I hope the LT will have a Media leader who can begin to explore options for reaching millions as effectively as possible!

-Jim Manske, GCC

Thank you Jim :-) --Dieudonné 16:04, 6 January 2007 (CET)

I am wondering who is on the CNVC LT, the CNVC GCC, and the CNVC Board, and how they all relate to each other. I thought at one point that the GCC would become the new board - is that still the plan? I have looked around on the wiki and see no explanations. Would anyone be willing to point me to a page that explains all this, or write an explanation as relevant to the topof those three pages? Also, it would be helpful if each page listed who the current members are, and when there terms (if any) end. --John Abbe 21:08, 15 April 2007 (CEST)