Proposed by the After-meeting Ad hoc Committee
An ad hoc committee consisting of members of the SMR community have been meeting to discuss issues raised regarding the after-meeting fellowship time that takes place on the SMR zoom channel following the daily meeting. Please see Motion 26-5 on the acamorning.org website for the committee’s full final report.
This motion has been adopted.
This motion received 84% approval. There were 25 votes received – 21 votes were in favor, 4 were against. Note that a follow-up Town Hall discussion was seen as beneficial – 16 members (64%) said yes, 9 (36%) said no.
Further discussion would be needed to determine both the length of the timed shares and the duration at the start of the After-meeting. There was no consensus on these points.
As to how long an individual timed share would be:
- 3 minutes/ 38%
- 4 minutes/ 29%
- 5 minutes/ 33%
As to the duration of the timed part of the beginning of the After-meeting
- till the top of the hour (25minutes)/ 33%
- till a quarter after the hour (40 minutes)/ 24%
- till the bottom of the hour (55 minutes)/ 43%
While no one is assigned to oversee the next steps in establishing the timing of After-meeting shares, someone, or a group of members, is welcome to step up to facilitate the process. This issue will likely be raised at a business meeting on the 15th of the month.
Issue:
The ad hoc committee proposes that, for a 2 month trial period, a 5-minute time limit on shares be imposed during the FIRST HOUR of the after-meeting, until 9:30am EST. These shares are intended to be self-timed though the speaker may ask to be timed by the host or other volunteer timekeeper. At 9:30am EST, the meeting will revert to its tradition of untimed shares with members
being asked to be mindful of others waiting to share.
Background:
Since this is a major change, we recommend that this be implemented on a trial basis of two months. At the end of that time, a new proposal will need to be made to make this change permanent. If no proposal is made at the end of two months then the space will
revert to its more traditional untimed format.
Untimed shares are a vitally important aspect of the after-meeting fellowship time. Members value having the space and time to express themselves fully without the pressure of worrying about their time running out. However, the committee recognizes that when there are a lot of people in the room waiting to share, long shares can preclude others from being able to share at all. Our recommendation is that for the first hour, when there are the largest number of participants, that this generous 5-minute time limit be imposed to allow a larger number of people to have a chance to speak.
30 thoughts on “Motion 26-6: After-meeting – Timed Shares”
I am in favor of this motion for the structure and stability for an hour and then to flow to transition to untimed shares. I feel peaceful thinking this may bring balance order and flow. Im glad my suggestion for this is considered. Would the fellowship host have to enforce this time boundary and how would that happen without authority issues coming up?
Thanks to all the service members and participants for your hard work to bring the principals and traditions to the fellowship. I am grateful.
As someone who rarely attends an after meeting , in part due to lengthy shares, I believe a trial of timed share would be helpful at least during the first hour.
Thank you.
5 minute share during the first hour are considerate of those who can spend only the 1st hour after the meeting. At times I needed to leave because 2 or 3 people before me in line each shared for 10 minutes taking up the 20 to 30 minutes of my time available to share something feeling urgent. I would like the moderator to spend less time responding to each speaker therefore enabling more persons with their hands raised to speak. ( Know that I do appreciate the moderator role. )
FYI to me hearing the words “trauma dumping ” is close to “having needs”. I avoided Therapy and care because I didn’t want to be viewed as being in need, or weak. Now I am uncertain that sharing my experience as an adult child with the group is inappropriate. I must first consider others feelings and satisfy their needs? I would be good to define “trauma dumping” so people are all on the same page .
I support the motion, which applies most to “feedback” shares. Seems important to me that feedback be attuned to what best serves the recipient (the one who asked the question) — what they asked for, how much they can absorb from any one feedback share, and how much they can absorb in total feedback.
Let’s face it, this meeting is priceless and gives so much to so many. Progress, not perfection, right!?
Research shows that shares up to three minutes allows clear contributions, equity for everyone, and increased engagement. Regarding attention spans, people often check out after 60 to 90 seconds.
Though we do ask people to consider when other hands are raised, 10- and 15-minute shares – or even longer – are not unheard of and consume limited time budgets. Unfortunately, online after-meetings can’t fully mirror in-person fellowship. Reaching out one-on-one is a core tenet of the program.
My thoughts: 5-minute shares are generous, and reaching out one-on-one for extended time is a core tenet of the program. Reducing the limit after the first hour still leaves space for those who need to speak longer.
This suggestion for the timed shares would work for the first 1/2 hour of the after-meeting, 1 hour is too long… then untimed shares can continue.
This is an AFTER-MEETING, or another way to call it is the PARKING LOT. It’s not an actual meeting. People choose to stay after the meeting for continued connection by sharing in an open and honest way without being timed in a meeting. If people want to be timed, then we can attend a meeting, not an after-meeting. I don’t think it’s necessary to be timed when I am sharing with my fellow travelers during my relaxed open kinship AFTER THE MEETING.
Gentle Reminder: This is NOT an actual meeting; it’s a group of people gathered together after the meeting who want to share time and space to give each other what helps us grow in our lives stemming from shared experiences being an ACA.
(If it doesn’t work for you, then please remember you can leave at any time; it is not a requirement to attend.)
I’m skeptical of the limit being for a whole hour, but I really appreciate the gentleness of this motion with the built-in sunset. I bet I’ll find it’s an awesome guideline in practice 🙂
I think 5-minute shares for the first hour is a great idea (and being able to share more than once, if needed, is a nice part of the after meeting).
I think 3 -5 minutes is plenty of time. People can always come back to share again.
I like it fine the way it’s been operating and see no need for changing it. I think that imposing a 5 minute time rule will eliminate the element of relaxed spontaneity and comfort which I love about the after meeting. When our wonderfully organized highly consistent and safe one hour meeting is over, I think it is nice to know the formalities are over right off the bat. The gathering becomes like a parking lot, a comfortable place where courtesy still reigns but timers don’t have to run. Certain courtesies are consistently observed such as using the first part for inviting newcomers to ask questions or introduce themselves more fully and asking people to be aware of raised hands and to feel free to come back in if they want to talk longer. I don’t attend all the time, but my experience has been that the longer shares usually don’t come till at least a half hour or more has elapsed anyway.
Thank you for your response; I agree with your comments.
I believe five minutes is too long and can unintentionally invite trauma-dumping. If the goal is for people to share their experience, strength, and hope in response to a specific question or a specific help request, I think two minutes is more than enough. Likewise, two minutes for feedback is sufficient.
My understanding is that many adult children who are emerging from survival mode have a limited capacity to absorb extended sharing. In this context, less is often more. Keeping shares concise can help participants stay present, focused on the topic, and reduce the likelihood of discussions drifting into distorted thinking. A meaningful and heartfelt message can be shared in just two minutes.
And when there are many raised hands, it may also be helpful to invite members to avoid repeating points that have already been shared. If someone was planning to say essentially the same thing, they could simply acknowledge that they relate to what has already been said and allow the meeting to move on, creating space for additional perspectives.
There is always the option of not staying for the after- meeting, or of muting one’s audio if one is not enjoying someone’s “trauma dumping.” There are lots of options for taking care of oneself in or out of the after meeting.
Yes!
Thanks for your response.
I think the after-meeting is the right place for “trauma dumping.” AA often teases ACAD for foucsing on the problem, and yes we do, and I”m proud and grateful of that! It’s not until I had clarity on the problem that I could begin my healing.
The after meeting and newcomer sections are good places to share the details of our abuse/neglect.
Note the term is falling out of favor with many trauma-focussed groups and professionals.
It’s so sad this term ever entered the healing process in society at all. It’s cold and cruel. We all need to release the critical inner voices that were installed into us from birth.
To call it trauma dumping is deeply disturbing.
This is the place for trauma unburdening; it is nowhere near dumping.
If you want to coin a new phrase, then call it “trauma-trumping”—meaning “overriding” (not referring to potus)
Thanks for your comment Eric R.
yes. 5 mins for share or response. history of well over tjat. with unlimitted shares, however. the person holding the room should not respond like a talk host but adhere to same boundaries . the after room room needs raised hands.
The comments above are offered by travelers who do not attend the after meeting on a regular basis. It would seem prudent to have a minimum requirement of attendance before allowing votes regarding the issues pertaining to this space.
Wow, well said! Thanks for your input!
subjective statement as to attendance and comments; i prefer all votes to be counted in general for all votes connected to this meeting; per traditions, rather than establishing a rule pathologizing a member’s attendance in order to vote. all comments are valid i feel, in the spirit of Tony A. rehardless of attendance. i skipped a lot school as a kid.
The comments above are offered by travelers who do not attend the after meeting on a regular basis. It would seem prudent to have a minimum requirement of attendance before allowing votes regarding the issues pertaining to this space.
Many replies are anonymous so it is hard to know who is the after meeting. But I think that is great with getting a lot of feedback.
I think this makes a lot of sense. Shares longer than 5 minutes can take place in one-on-one calls (that’s why we have a contact list). I like Dom’s suggestion of inviting the sharer to “get back in line” if 5 minutes proved not to be enough.
I agree with a timed share of 5 minutes until 9:30am EST. I appreciate all the thoughtfulness and group conscious decision! Thank you to all who are offering service around this and other aspects of the meeting.
I agree that timing would be a useful practice. 5 minutes seems like a good amount. I also find it useful when the leader checks in after a couple of answers to a newcomer query, asking if this has been helpful, do they need to hear more, etc. this allows us to open it up to another newcomer’s question.
I really agree with your comment above. I’d like with the leader circles back and confirmed that the newcomers are complete with their questions
Agreed. 5 minutes is plenty and I would think even shorter is better at the beginning when there are so many that won’t ever get a chance with a long-winder at the helm! But 5 minutes is good, with the admonition to still be aware of the line of hands raised behind you and to wind it up if there are a bunch. This is also where room-host training can be valuable in authorizing them to prompt a long winded speaker to pause for now and get back in line, if there are many hands raised that the speaker may not be noticing and/or respecting.
My suggestion is 3 minutes. A person can always speak again at a later time.
I believe this motion is very fair. 5 minutes is definitely long enough to get one’s main point across. And after that first hour there’ll be plenty more time for those who want to share more.
This is a good suggestion. I find myself zoning out when shares go on for 10, 15, 20+ minutes
Comments are closed.