I’m sorry to say that — apart from an exercise in airing grievances — the fixing the UUA campaign didn’t say much. I think I’m with Steve Caldwell (or what he intimates at least) that first reforms should not depend on UUA Bylaws changes. I’m also not keen on proposing as a reform platform — streamlining the UUA or sharing best bractices — that reasonable people would already want, and which might be effectively attempted for want of spare effort and labor to accomplish them. None of the rest of the suggestions say anything to me, so I’ll not be voting.
Of course, this might be the longest sustained think-out-loud experience of people wanting to change UUA systems I’ve ever heard (boozy ministerial dinners don’t count) and that’s worth the effort in the first place. So thanks to ChaliceChick for kicking it off.
A thought: the suggestions seem to rest in the institutional and procedural “middle.” Not the small-scale incremental steps that you or I could take to begin a groundswell, and not the big meta-ideas that can help frame a general platform (and a real fight.) That’s a problem, because “middle” ideas are too big and too small to be the stuff of passion. I ain’t falling on the St. Louis headquarters or biennial GA sword, and I think few will.
And that’s the difference between a think-exercise (which UUs do well) and subtantive change, and perhaps we can keep this up and find our feet in subsequent rounds.