MM
Michael M Pannwitz
Sun, Nov 2, 2025 2:51 PM
Dear Tony,
"If Paulo Freire, Buckminster Fuller, or Wangari Maathai were hosting
this gathering, what questions would they ask that we might not
otherwise consider?"
If they were hosting they would have their say at the beginning of the
ost event, introduce the facilitator/companion/witness and slip into the
role of participants.
In that role they would post issues, those might also be questions, etc.
They might also not enter issues but roam as butterflies or bumble bees
or do both, etc.
Or leave the event.
Or leave and think and come back a bit later.
(I experienced one such participant at a London OSonOS, he was terribly
nervous,
left the event, stopped at the next pub, had several beers and returned...).
Butterflies simply hang out and often are visited by other butterflies
to dream, etc.
Bumble bees are those visiting this or that breakout session and
pollinate without lingering or also stay.
Any "systemic forces" that interest them, can get on the wall.
If they believe that they will understand "systemic forces" or even
fumble with systemic
forces they might be admired or find themselves alone in their breakout
session.
The latter is also wonderful:
Nobody came and I am the only participant that can deal with this stuff.
Unless a bumble bee visits, the participant has all the time and can write
a beautiful or not page for the final paper.
Here are 3 utterings of the three folks you mentioned
"Nobody knows everything, but nobody knows nothing."
"Call me Trimtab"
"We all need to work hard to make a difference in our neighborhoods,
regions, and countries, and in the world as a whole. That means making
sure we work hard, collaborate, and make ourselves better agents to change."
The author of the 3rd quote is from Kenya.
I would not be surprised if her spirit would wave through the WOSonOS
starting
in 4 days.
Greetings from a wonderful fall day in Berlin
mmp
Am 01.11.2025 um 21:19 schrieb Tony Budak:
Thanks for clarifying the facilitator’s role and the value of “doing
nothing” in terms of content. My concern is that not all systemic
forces show up as issues on the wall. They often shape who speaks,
whose ideas stick, and what gets treated as “real work.” If we only
respond when someone names it, we risk letting those forces quietly
steer us back to the status quo.
So here’s my provocation: If Paulo Freire, Buckminster Fuller, or
Wangari Maathai were hosting this gathering, what questions would they
ask that we might not otherwise consider?
On 11/1/2025 6:27 AM, Michael M Pannwitz wrote:
If "larger systemic forces" turn up during an ost event, entered by a
participant of the gathered system in the circle I might address that
person to add his issue on the wall so that the issue has a name and
a time for a breakout session.
In addition to posting issue at the times when folks gather in a
circle (normally gatherings in the morning and in the evening) I also
suggest to post issues at any time. To have
those issues to be visible I suggest to use a different marker colour
(the markers provided in the circle have one color, usually black or
blue, between circles I remove those markers and provide red marker
so that the new issue stands out).
Usually, several issues show up and are posted between circles...
when I see them I ask
the participants in the next circle to introduce it to the whole crowd).
I myself would not process "the very dynamics we hope to transform",
it would destroy
my main task, namely to do nothing.
The participants are free and able to process stuff.
If they want to deal with the issue "dynamics we hope to transform",
they can and will will
act.
Greetings from Berlin
mmp
Am 01.11.2025 um 09:38 schrieb Tony Budak via OSList:
Hi Michael,
Thanks for your thoughtful clarification. I hear you on the OS
worker’s role and the commitments of the process. My concern isn’t
with the intentions of facilitators, or participants, but with how
larger systemic forces—biases, economic pressures—can still shape
what feels possible in the room. Even in open formats, those forces
don’t disappear. I’m curious to know if and how you, or other
practitioners, have noticed or addressed this tension in practice.
My question is about how we notice and respond when the process
itself—despite its openness—begins to mirror the very dynamics we
hope to transform. How do we stay awake to that? How do we design
for more profound disruption, not just participation?
I’m grateful for the chance to explore this with you all.
On 11/1/2025 3:42 AM, Michael M Pannwitz via OSList wrote:
Dear Tony,
the usual intention of an os worker is to expand time and space for
the unfolding
of the force of selforganisation.
The os worker does not have intentions on the content of the os
process.
The participants work actionoriented.
The only promises of the ost process are that
--- Every issue of concern to anybody will have been raised, if
they took
responsibility for doing that
--- All issues will have received full discussion, to the extent
desired
--- A full report of issues and discussions will be in the hands of
all
participants
--- Priorities will be set and action plans will be made.
The last has been changed since setting priorities is a statistical
game, the real
game is taking responsibility for the stuff that participants live
for. So folks gather
to work on their projects.
Have a great day
mmp
Am 31.10.2025 um 21:28 schrieb Tony Budak via OSList:
I won’t be able to attend the OST conference in Kenya, but I’m
following along with interest. What I keep wondering is this: even
with the best intentions, does Open Space sometimes end up
reflecting the same biases and profit‑driven values of the larger
system—pulling us back to the status quo instead of opening the
way to real change? I’d love to hear how others have worked with
this tension.
OSList mailing list --everyone@oslist.org
To unsubscribe send an email toeveryone-leave@oslist.org
See the archives here:https://oslist.org/empathy/list/everyone.oslist.org
Dear Tony,
"If Paulo Freire, Buckminster Fuller, or Wangari Maathai were hosting
this gathering, what questions would they ask that we might not
otherwise consider?"
If they were hosting they would have their say at the beginning of the
ost event, introduce the facilitator/companion/witness and slip into the
role of participants.
In that role they would post issues, those might also be questions, etc.
They might also not enter issues but roam as butterflies or bumble bees
or do both, etc.
Or leave the event.
Or leave and think and come back a bit later.
(I experienced one such participant at a London OSonOS, he was terribly
nervous,
left the event, stopped at the next pub, had several beers and returned...).
Butterflies simply hang out and often are visited by other butterflies
to dream, etc.
Bumble bees are those visiting this or that breakout session and
pollinate without lingering or also stay.
Any "systemic forces" that interest them, can get on the wall.
If they believe that they will understand "systemic forces" or even
fumble with systemic
forces they might be admired or find themselves alone in their breakout
session.
The latter is also wonderful:
Nobody came and I am the only participant that can deal with this stuff.
Unless a bumble bee visits, the participant has all the time and can write
a beautiful or not page for the final paper.
Here are 3 utterings of the three folks you mentioned
"Nobody knows everything, but nobody knows nothing."
"Call me Trimtab"
"We all need to work hard to make a difference in our neighborhoods,
regions, and countries, and in the world as a whole. That means making
sure we work hard, collaborate, and make ourselves better agents to change."
The author of the 3rd quote is from Kenya.
I would not be surprised if her spirit would wave through the WOSonOS
starting
in 4 days.
Greetings from a wonderful fall day in Berlin
mmp
Am 01.11.2025 um 21:19 schrieb Tony Budak:
>
> Thanks for clarifying the facilitator’s role and the value of “doing
> nothing” in terms of content. My concern is that not all systemic
> forces show up as issues on the wall. They often shape who speaks,
> whose ideas stick, and what gets treated as “real work.” If we only
> respond when someone names it, we risk letting those forces quietly
> steer us back to the status quo.
>
> So here’s my provocation: *If Paulo Freire, Buckminster Fuller, or
> Wangari Maathai were hosting this gathering, what questions would they
> ask that we might not otherwise consider?*
>
>
> On 11/1/2025 6:27 AM, Michael M Pannwitz wrote:
>> If "larger systemic forces" turn up during an ost event, entered by a
>> participant of the gathered system in the circle I might address that
>> person to add his issue on the wall so that the issue has a name and
>> a time for a breakout session.
>> In addition to posting issue at the times when folks gather in a
>> circle (normally gatherings in the morning and in the evening) I also
>> suggest to post issues at any time. To have
>> those issues to be visible I suggest to use a different marker colour
>> (the markers provided in the circle have one color, usually black or
>> blue, between circles I remove those markers and provide red marker
>> so that the new issue stands out).
>> Usually, several issues show up and are posted between circles...
>> when I see them I ask
>> the participants in the next circle to introduce it to the whole crowd).
>>
>> I myself would not process "the very dynamics we hope to transform",
>> it would destroy
>> my main task, namely to do nothing.
>> The participants are free and able to process stuff.
>> If they want to deal with the issue "dynamics we hope to transform",
>> they can and will will
>> act.
>>
>>
>> Greetings from Berlin
>> mmp
>>
>>
>> Am 01.11.2025 um 09:38 schrieb Tony Budak via OSList:
>>>
>>> Hi Michael,
>>>
>>> Thanks for your thoughtful clarification. I hear you on the OS
>>> worker’s role and the commitments of the process. My concern isn’t
>>> with the intentions of facilitators, or participants, but with how
>>> larger systemic forces—biases, economic pressures—can still shape
>>> what feels possible in the room. Even in open formats, those forces
>>> don’t disappear. I’m curious to know if and how you, or other
>>> practitioners, have noticed or addressed this tension in practice.
>>>
>>> My question is about how we notice and respond when the process
>>> itself—despite its openness—begins to mirror the very dynamics we
>>> hope to transform. How do we stay awake to that? How do we design
>>> for more profound disruption, not just participation?
>>>
>>> I’m grateful for the chance to explore this with you all.
>>>
>>>
>>> On 11/1/2025 3:42 AM, Michael M Pannwitz via OSList wrote:
>>>> Dear Tony,
>>>>
>>>> the usual intention of an os worker is to expand time and space for
>>>> the unfolding
>>>> of the force of selforganisation.
>>>> The os worker does not have intentions on the content of the os
>>>> process.
>>>> The participants work actionoriented.
>>>>
>>>> The only promises of the ost process are that
>>>>
>>>> --- Every issue of concern to anybody will have been raised, if
>>>> they took
>>>> responsibility for doing that
>>>> --- All issues will have received full discussion, to the extent
>>>> desired
>>>> --- A full report of issues and discussions will be in the hands of
>>>> all
>>>> participants
>>>> --- Priorities will be set and action plans will be made.
>>>>
>>>> The last has been changed since setting priorities is a statistical
>>>> game, the real
>>>> game is taking responsibility for the stuff that participants live
>>>> for. So folks gather
>>>> to work on their projects.
>>>>
>>>> Have a great day
>>>> mmp
>>>>
>>>> Am 31.10.2025 um 21:28 schrieb Tony Budak via OSList:
>>>>>
>>>>> I won’t be able to attend the OST conference in Kenya, but I’m
>>>>> following along with interest. What I keep wondering is this: even
>>>>> with the best intentions, does Open Space sometimes end up
>>>>> reflecting the same biases and profit‑driven values of the larger
>>>>> system—pulling us back to the status quo instead of opening the
>>>>> way to real change? I’d love to hear how others have worked with
>>>>> this tension.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> OSList mailing list --everyone@oslist.org
>>>>> To unsubscribe send an email toeveryone-leave@oslist.org
>>>>> See the archives here:https://oslist.org/empathy/list/everyone.oslist.org
>>>>
>>
Michael M Pannwitz
Draisweg 1, 12209 Berlin, Germany
+49 30 7728000mmpannwitz@posteo.de
WOSonOS will be in Kenya in November 6th-8th, 2025, have a look
https://www.wosonos2025.org/
RW
Rain Warren
Sun, Nov 2, 2025 3:06 PM
Michael,
I LOVE THAT QUESTION! I would even love to attend an Open Space with those
three in attendance. These questions really made my morning!
I asked Ai your question and here are the results:
That’s a brilliant question — and exactly the kind of reflective inquiry
those three visionaries would love. Each of them approached
transformation—of people, systems, and the planet—from profoundly different
but complementary angles: Freire through critical consciousness, Fuller
through design and systems thinking, and Maathai through ecological
stewardship and community empowerment.
Here’s how each might frame unexpected, deeper questions for a
gathering—questions that reach beyond the obvious and challenge
participants to think in revolutionary ways.
🐝 If Paulo Freire Were Hosting: The Pedagogy of Liberation
Freire would ask questions that awaken awareness, dialogue, and
co-creation.
He would resist one-way communication and instead invite reflection that
dismantles hierarchy.
Questions Freire might ask:
What truths have we been taught to accept without question—and what
happens if we reimagine them together?
2.
Who is absent from this conversation, and how might their presence
transform our understanding?
3.
In what ways are we both oppressed and oppressor in the systems we
inhabit?
4.
How can learning become an act of love and liberation rather than
control and compliance?
5.
If dialogue itself is a form of action, how might we speak today so
that freedom grows from our words?
🦋 If Buckminster Fuller Were Hosting: The Architect of a Better Future
Fuller would push the group to see humanity as a design challenge—not a
problem to fix but a system to evolve.
His questions would stretch imagination toward synergy, sustainability,
and long-range thinking.
Questions Fuller might ask:
If our goal were to make the world work for 100% of humanity, what
assumptions would we need to discard immediately?
2.
What patterns of waste—energy, time, or human potential—can we redesign
into resources?
3.
How might we use the fewest resources to achieve the greatest good for
the greatest number?
4.
What would our actions look like if we designed for seven generations
ahead rather than one fiscal year?
5.
If the universe is inherently regenerative, what might it be trying to
teach us about balance and efficiency?
If Wangari Maathai Were Hosting: The Spirit of Replenishment
Maathai would call the gathering back to the earth, community, and moral
courage.
Her questions would awaken the spiritual and ecological consciousness
within social change.
Questions Maathai might ask:
What are we planting—literally and figuratively—that will nourish the
generations to come?
2.
How can healing the land help us heal ourselves and our societies?
3.
When we speak of progress, whose soil, trees, and rivers pay the price?
4.
What courage is required to nurture life in a world that rewards
destruction?
5.
How can the smallest act—a seed, a gesture, a truth—become a revolution
of care?
On Sun, Nov 2, 2025 at 9:52 AM Michael M Pannwitz via OSList <
everyone@oslist.org> wrote:
Dear Tony,
"If Paulo Freire, Buckminster Fuller, or Wangari Maathai were hosting this
gathering, what questions would they ask that we might not otherwise
consider?"
If they were hosting they would have their say at the beginning of the ost
event, introduce the facilitator/companion/witness and slip into the role
of participants.
In that role they would post issues, those might also be questions, etc.
They might also not enter issues but roam as butterflies or bumble bees or
do both, etc.
Or leave the event.
Or leave and think and come back a bit later.
(I experienced one such participant at a London OSonOS, he was terribly
nervous,
left the event, stopped at the next pub, had several beers and
returned...).
Butterflies simply hang out and often are visited by other butterflies to
dream, etc.
Bumble bees are those visiting this or that breakout session and pollinate
without lingering or also stay.
Any "systemic forces" that interest them, can get on the wall.
If they believe that they will understand "systemic forces" or even fumble
with systemic
forces they might be admired or find themselves alone in their breakout
session.
The latter is also wonderful:
Nobody came and I am the only participant that can deal with this stuff.
Unless a bumble bee visits, the participant has all the time and can write
a beautiful or not page for the final paper.
Here are 3 utterings of the three folks you mentioned
"Nobody knows everything, but nobody knows nothing."
"Call me Trimtab"
"We all need to work hard to make a difference in our neighborhoods,
regions, and countries, and in the world as a whole. That means making sure
we work hard, collaborate, and make ourselves better agents to change."
The author of the 3rd quote is from Kenya.
I would not be surprised if her spirit would wave through the WOSonOS
starting
in 4 days.
Greetings from a wonderful fall day in Berlin
mmp
Am 01.11.2025 um 21:19 schrieb Tony Budak:
Thanks for clarifying the facilitator’s role and the value of “doing
nothing” in terms of content. My concern is that not all systemic forces
show up as issues on the wall. They often shape who speaks, whose ideas
stick, and what gets treated as “real work.” If we only respond when
someone names it, we risk letting those forces quietly steer us back to the
status quo.
So here’s my provocation: If Paulo Freire, Buckminster Fuller, or
Wangari Maathai were hosting this gathering, what questions would they ask
that we might not otherwise consider?
On 11/1/2025 6:27 AM, Michael M Pannwitz wrote:
If "larger systemic forces" turn up during an ost event, entered by a
participant of the gathered system in the circle I might address that
person to add his issue on the wall so that the issue has a name and a time
for a breakout session.
In addition to posting issue at the times when folks gather in a circle
(normally gatherings in the morning and in the evening) I also suggest to
post issues at any time. To have
those issues to be visible I suggest to use a different marker colour (the
markers provided in the circle have one color, usually black or blue,
between circles I remove those markers and provide red marker so that the
new issue stands out).
Usually, several issues show up and are posted between circles... when I
see them I ask
the participants in the next circle to introduce it to the whole crowd).
I myself would not process "the very dynamics we hope to transform", it
would destroy
my main task, namely to do nothing.
The participants are free and able to process stuff.
If they want to deal with the issue "dynamics we hope to transform", they
can and will will
act.
Greetings from Berlin
mmp
Am 01.11.2025 um 09:38 schrieb Tony Budak via OSList:
Hi Michael,
Thanks for your thoughtful clarification. I hear you on the OS worker’s
role and the commitments of the process. My concern isn’t with the
intentions of facilitators, or participants, but with how larger systemic
forces—biases, economic pressures—can still shape what feels possible in
the room. Even in open formats, those forces don’t disappear. I’m curious
to know if and how you, or other practitioners, have noticed or addressed
this tension in practice.
My question is about how we notice and respond when the process
itself—despite its openness—begins to mirror the very dynamics we hope to
transform. How do we stay awake to that? How do we design for more profound
disruption, not just participation?
I’m grateful for the chance to explore this with you all.
On 11/1/2025 3:42 AM, Michael M Pannwitz via OSList wrote:
Dear Tony,
the usual intention of an os worker is to expand time and space for the
unfolding
of the force of selforganisation.
The os worker does not have intentions on the content of the os process.
The participants work actionoriented.
The only promises of the ost process are that
--- Every issue of concern to anybody will have been raised, if they took
responsibility for doing that
--- All issues will have received full discussion, to the extent desired
--- A full report of issues and discussions will be in the hands of all
participants
--- Priorities will be set and action plans will be made.
The last has been changed since setting priorities is a statistical game,
the real
game is taking responsibility for the stuff that participants live for. So
folks gather
to work on their projects.
Have a great day
mmp
Am 31.10.2025 um 21:28 schrieb Tony Budak via OSList:
I won’t be able to attend the OST conference in Kenya, but I’m following
along with interest. What I keep wondering is this: even with the best
intentions, does Open Space sometimes end up reflecting the same biases and
profit‑driven values of the larger system—pulling us back to the status quo
instead of opening the way to real change? I’d love to hear how others have
worked with this tension.
OSList mailing list -- everyone@oslist.org
To unsubscribe send an email to everyone-leave@oslist.org
See the archives here: https://oslist.org/empathy/list/everyone.oslist.org
Michael M Pannwitz
Draisweg 1, 12209 Berlin, Germany
+49 30 7728000 mmpannwitz@posteo.de
WOSonOS will be in Kenya in November 6th-8th, 2025, have a lookhttps://www.wosonos2025.org/
OSList mailing list -- everyone@oslist.org
To unsubscribe send an email to everyone-leave@oslist.org
See the archives here: https://oslist.org/empathy/list/everyone.oslist.org
Michael,
I LOVE THAT QUESTION! I would even love to attend an Open Space with those
three in attendance. These questions really made my morning!
*I asked Ai your question and here are the results:*
That’s a *brilliant* question — and exactly the kind of reflective inquiry
those three visionaries would love. Each of them approached
transformation—of people, systems, and the planet—from profoundly different
but complementary angles: Freire through *critical consciousness*, Fuller
through *design and systems thinking*, and Maathai through *ecological
stewardship and community empowerment*.
Here’s how each might frame *unexpected, deeper questions* for a
gathering—questions that reach beyond the obvious and challenge
participants to think in revolutionary ways.
🐝 *If Paulo Freire Were Hosting: The Pedagogy of Liberation*
Freire would ask questions that awaken *awareness, dialogue, and
co-creation*.
He would resist one-way communication and instead invite reflection that
dismantles hierarchy.
*Questions Freire might ask:*
1.
*What truths have we been taught to accept without question—and what
happens if we reimagine them together?*
2.
*Who is absent from this conversation, and how might their presence
transform our understanding?*
3.
*In what ways are we both oppressed and oppressor in the systems we
inhabit?*
4.
*How can learning become an act of love and liberation rather than
control and compliance?*
5.
*If dialogue itself is a form of action, how might we speak today so
that freedom grows from our words?*
*🦋 If Buckminster Fuller Were Hosting: The Architect of a Better Future*
Fuller would push the group to see *humanity as a design challenge*—not a
problem to fix but a system to evolve.
His questions would stretch imagination toward *synergy, sustainability,
and long-range thinking*.
*Questions Fuller might ask:*
1.
*If our goal were to make the world work for 100% of humanity, what
assumptions would we need to discard immediately?*
2.
*What patterns of waste—energy, time, or human potential—can we redesign
into resources?*
3.
*How might we use the fewest resources to achieve the greatest good for
the greatest number?*
4.
*What would our actions look like if we designed for seven generations
ahead rather than one fiscal year?*
5.
*If the universe is inherently regenerative, what might it be trying to
teach us about balance and efficiency?*
*If Wangari Maathai Were Hosting: The Spirit of Replenishment*
Maathai would call the gathering back to *the earth, community, and moral
courage*.
Her questions would awaken the *spiritual and ecological consciousness*
within social change.
*Questions Maathai might ask:*
1.
*What are we planting—literally and figuratively—that will nourish the
generations to come?*
2.
*How can healing the land help us heal ourselves and our societies?*
3.
*When we speak of progress, whose soil, trees, and rivers pay the price?*
4.
*What courage is required to nurture life in a world that rewards
destruction?*
5.
*How can the smallest act—a seed, a gesture, a truth—become a revolution
of care?*
On Sun, Nov 2, 2025 at 9:52 AM Michael M Pannwitz via OSList <
everyone@oslist.org> wrote:
> Dear Tony,
>
> "If Paulo Freire, Buckminster Fuller, or Wangari Maathai were hosting this
> gathering, what questions would they ask that we might not otherwise
> consider?"
>
> If they were hosting they would have their say at the beginning of the ost
> event, introduce the facilitator/companion/witness and slip into the role
> of participants.
>
> In that role they would post issues, those might also be questions, etc.
> They might also not enter issues but roam as butterflies or bumble bees or
> do both, etc.
> Or leave the event.
> Or leave and think and come back a bit later.
> (I experienced one such participant at a London OSonOS, he was terribly
> nervous,
> left the event, stopped at the next pub, had several beers and
> returned...).
>
> Butterflies simply hang out and often are visited by other butterflies to
> dream, etc.
>
> Bumble bees are those visiting this or that breakout session and pollinate
> without lingering or also stay.
>
> Any "systemic forces" that interest them, can get on the wall.
> If they believe that they will understand "systemic forces" or even fumble
> with systemic
> forces they might be admired or find themselves alone in their breakout
> session.
> The latter is also wonderful:
> Nobody came and I am the only participant that can deal with this stuff.
> Unless a bumble bee visits, the participant has all the time and can write
> a beautiful or not page for the final paper.
>
> Here are 3 utterings of the three folks you mentioned
> "Nobody knows everything, but nobody knows nothing."
> "Call me Trimtab"
> "We all need to work hard to make a difference in our neighborhoods,
> regions, and countries, and in the world as a whole. That means making sure
> we work hard, collaborate, and make ourselves better agents to change."
>
> The author of the 3rd quote is from Kenya.
> I would not be surprised if her spirit would wave through the WOSonOS
> starting
> in 4 days.
>
> Greetings from a wonderful fall day in Berlin
> mmp
>
> Am 01.11.2025 um 21:19 schrieb Tony Budak:
>
> Thanks for clarifying the facilitator’s role and the value of “doing
> nothing” in terms of content. My concern is that not all systemic forces
> show up as issues on the wall. They often shape who speaks, whose ideas
> stick, and what gets treated as “real work.” If we only respond when
> someone names it, we risk letting those forces quietly steer us back to the
> status quo.
>
> So here’s my provocation: *If Paulo Freire, Buckminster Fuller, or
> Wangari Maathai were hosting this gathering, what questions would they ask
> that we might not otherwise consider?*
>
>
> On 11/1/2025 6:27 AM, Michael M Pannwitz wrote:
>
> If "larger systemic forces" turn up during an ost event, entered by a
> participant of the gathered system in the circle I might address that
> person to add his issue on the wall so that the issue has a name and a time
> for a breakout session.
> In addition to posting issue at the times when folks gather in a circle
> (normally gatherings in the morning and in the evening) I also suggest to
> post issues at any time. To have
> those issues to be visible I suggest to use a different marker colour (the
> markers provided in the circle have one color, usually black or blue,
> between circles I remove those markers and provide red marker so that the
> new issue stands out).
> Usually, several issues show up and are posted between circles... when I
> see them I ask
> the participants in the next circle to introduce it to the whole crowd).
>
> I myself would not process "the very dynamics we hope to transform", it
> would destroy
> my main task, namely to do nothing.
> The participants are free and able to process stuff.
> If they want to deal with the issue "dynamics we hope to transform", they
> can and will will
> act.
>
>
> Greetings from Berlin
> mmp
>
>
> Am 01.11.2025 um 09:38 schrieb Tony Budak via OSList:
>
> Hi Michael,
>
> Thanks for your thoughtful clarification. I hear you on the OS worker’s
> role and the commitments of the process. My concern isn’t with the
> intentions of facilitators, or participants, but with how larger systemic
> forces—biases, economic pressures—can still shape what feels possible in
> the room. Even in open formats, those forces don’t disappear. I’m curious
> to know if and how you, or other practitioners, have noticed or addressed
> this tension in practice.
>
> My question is about how we notice and respond when the process
> itself—despite its openness—begins to mirror the very dynamics we hope to
> transform. How do we stay awake to that? How do we design for more profound
> disruption, not just participation?
>
> I’m grateful for the chance to explore this with you all.
>
>
> On 11/1/2025 3:42 AM, Michael M Pannwitz via OSList wrote:
>
> Dear Tony,
>
> the usual intention of an os worker is to expand time and space for the
> unfolding
> of the force of selforganisation.
> The os worker does not have intentions on the content of the os process.
> The participants work actionoriented.
>
> The only promises of the ost process are that
>
> --- Every issue of concern to anybody will have been raised, if they took
> responsibility for doing that
> --- All issues will have received full discussion, to the extent desired
> --- A full report of issues and discussions will be in the hands of all
> participants
> --- Priorities will be set and action plans will be made.
>
> The last has been changed since setting priorities is a statistical game,
> the real
> game is taking responsibility for the stuff that participants live for. So
> folks gather
> to work on their projects.
>
> Have a great day
> mmp
>
> Am 31.10.2025 um 21:28 schrieb Tony Budak via OSList:
>
> I won’t be able to attend the OST conference in Kenya, but I’m following
> along with interest. What I keep wondering is this: even with the best
> intentions, does Open Space sometimes end up reflecting the same biases and
> profit‑driven values of the larger system—pulling us back to the status quo
> instead of opening the way to real change? I’d love to hear how others have
> worked with this tension.
>
> OSList mailing list -- everyone@oslist.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to everyone-leave@oslist.org
> See the archives here: https://oslist.org/empathy/list/everyone.oslist.org
>
>
>
>
> Michael M Pannwitz
> Draisweg 1, 12209 Berlin, Germany
> +49 30 7728000 mmpannwitz@posteo.de
>
> WOSonOS will be in Kenya in November 6th-8th, 2025, have a lookhttps://www.wosonos2025.org/
>
> OSList mailing list -- everyone@oslist.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to everyone-leave@oslist.org
> See the archives here: https://oslist.org/empathy/list/everyone.oslist.org
TB
Tony Budak
Mon, Nov 3, 2025 4:06 PM
Beyond Business as Usual: Kenya WOSonOS 2025
A Wake-Up Call for OST Practitioners - Learning to Change, Together
Friends,
Open Space Technology (OST) has always promised transformation. But
let’s be honest: too often, it’s used to manage change—not to /make/ it.
We gather, we post issues, we talk—and then we return to the same
systems that created the problems we came to solve.
If we’re serious about shifting paradigms, we need to confront the
deeper forces that shape our gatherings before the first circle even
begins. That starts with how we write our invitations.
Seven Challenges to the Status Quo
Here are seven provocations—four from Dorian Cave
https://madocollective.org/connecting/who.html, three from visionary
changemakers—that I believe every OST invitation should wrestle with:
Dorian Cave’s Four Denials of Modernity-Coloniality:
-
Denial of systemic, historical, and ongoing violence
→ Are we willing to name the harm that shaped our institutions—and
our own complicity in it?
-
Denial of planetary limits
→ Are we pretending we can innovate our way out of ecological
collapse without changing how we live?
-
Denial of entanglement
→ Are we still acting as if we’re separate individuals, rather than
deeply interdependent?
-
Denial of the magnitude and complexity of the crisis
→ Are we shrinking the problem to fit our comfort zone, instead of
expanding our courage?
Three Provocateurs to Shake the Frame:
-
Paulo Freire would ask: /Whose voices are missing, and how are we
reproducing hierarchy even in “open” spaces?/
-
Buckminster Fuller would ask: /Are we redesigning the system, or
just rearranging the furniture?/
-
Wangari Maathai would ask: /Where is the Earth in this
conversation? What are we doing to protect life itself?/
A New Kind of Invitation
If we want OST to be more than a clever format—if we want it to be a
vessel for paradigm shift—then our invitations must do more than ask,
“What do you care about?” They must ask:
- What truths have we been trained not to see?
- What questions are too dangerous to name?
- What futures are possible if we compost the cultural “stuff” that
keeps us stuck?
Let’s stop pretending that neutrality is safe. Let’s write invitations
that disturb the comfortable and comfort the disturbed.
OST practitioners, this is your moment.
You don’t need to copy this word for word—but I invite you to adapt it
boldly, responsibly, and in your own voice. Let it reflect the real
tensions we’re living through. Let it compost the cultural “stuff” that
keeps us stuck. Let it call forth the kind of gathering that Dorian
Cavé,Paulo Freire, Buckminster Fuller, or Wangari Maathai would be proud
to host.
In solidarity—for more fun, joy, love, and less stuff,
Tony
On 11/2/2025 10:06 AM, Rain Warren via OSList wrote:
Michael,
I LOVE THAT QUESTION! I would even love to attend an Open Space with
those three in attendance. These questions really made my morning!
I asked Ai your question and here are the results:
That’s a /brilliant/ question — and exactly the kind of reflective
inquiry those three visionaries would love. Each of them approached
transformation—of people, systems, and the planet—from profoundly
different but complementary angles: Freire through critical
consciousness, Fuller through design and systems thinking, and
Maathai through ecological stewardship and community empowerment.
Here’s how each might frame /unexpected, deeper questions/ for a
gathering—questions that reach beyond the obvious and challenge
participants to think in revolutionary ways.
🐝 *If Paulo Freire Were Hosting: The Pedagogy of Liberation*
Freire would ask questions that awaken awareness, dialogue, and
co-creation.
He would resist one-way communication and instead invite reflection
that dismantles hierarchy.
Questions Freire might ask:
/What truths have we been taught to accept without question—and
what happens if we reimagine them together?/
/Who is absent from this conversation, and how might their
presence transform our understanding?/
/In what ways are we both oppressed and oppressor in the systems
we inhabit?/
/How can learning become an act of love and liberation rather than
control and compliance?/
/If dialogue itself is a form of action, how might we speak today
so that freedom grows from our words?/
*🦋 If Buckminster Fuller Were Hosting: The Architect of a
Better Future*
Fuller would push the group to see humanity as a design
challenge—not a problem to fix but a system to evolve.
His questions would stretch imagination toward synergy,
sustainability, and long-range thinking.
Questions Fuller might ask:
/If our goal were to make the world work for 100% of humanity,
what assumptions would we need to discard immediately?/
/What patterns of waste—energy, time, or human potential—can we
redesign into resources?/
/How might we use the fewest resources to achieve the greatest
good for the greatest number?/
/What would our actions look like if we designed for seven
generations ahead rather than one fiscal year?/
/If the universe is inherently regenerative, what might it be
trying to teach us about balance and efficiency?/
*If Wangari Maathai Were Hosting: The Spirit of Replenishment*
Maathai would call the gathering back to the earth, community, and
moral courage.
Her questions would awaken the spiritual and ecological
consciousness within social change.
Questions Maathai might ask:
/What are we planting—literally and figuratively—that will nourish
the generations to come?/
/How can healing the land help us heal ourselves and our societies?/
/When we speak of progress, whose soil, trees, and rivers pay the
price?/
/What courage is required to nurture life in a world that rewards
destruction?/
/How can the smallest act—a seed, a gesture, a truth—become a
revolution of care?/
On Sun, Nov 2, 2025 at 9:52 AM Michael M Pannwitz via OSList
everyone@oslist.org wrote:
Dear Tony,
"If Paulo Freire, Buckminster Fuller, or Wangari Maathai were
hosting this gathering, what questions would they ask that we
might not otherwise consider?"
If they were hosting they would have their say at the beginning of
the ost event, introduce the facilitator/companion/witness and
slip into the role of participants.
In that role they would post issues, those might also be
questions, etc.
They might also not enter issues but roam as butterflies or bumble
bees or do both, etc.
Or leave the event.
Or leave and think and come back a bit later.
(I experienced one such participant at a London OSonOS, he was
terribly nervous,
left the event, stopped at the next pub, had several beers and
returned...).
Butterflies simply hang out and often are visited by other
butterflies to dream, etc.
Bumble bees are those visiting this or that breakout session and
pollinate without lingering or also stay.
Any "systemic forces" that interest them, can get on the wall.
If they believe that they will understand "systemic forces" or
even fumble with systemic
forces they might be admired or find themselves alone in their
breakout session.
The latter is also wonderful:
Nobody came and I am the only participant that can deal with this
stuff.
Unless a bumble bee visits, the participant has all the time and
can write
a beautiful or not page for the final paper.
Here are 3 utterings of the three folks you mentioned
"Nobody knows everything, but nobody knows nothing."
"Call me Trimtab"
"We all need to work hard to make a difference in our
neighborhoods, regions, and countries, and in the world as a
whole. That means making sure we work hard, collaborate, and make
ourselves better agents to change."
The author of the 3rd quote is from Kenya.
I would not be surprised if her spirit would wave through the
WOSonOS starting
in 4 days.
Greetings from a wonderful fall day in Berlin
mmp
Am 01.11.2025 um 21:19 schrieb Tony Budak:
Thanks for clarifying the facilitator’s role and the value of
“doing nothing” in terms of content. My concern is that not all
systemic forces show up as issues on the wall. They often shape
who speaks, whose ideas stick, and what gets treated as “real
work.” If we only respond when someone names it, we risk letting
those forces quietly steer us back to the status quo.
So here’s my provocation: *If Paulo Freire, Buckminster Fuller,
or Wangari Maathai were hosting this gathering, what questions
would they ask that we might not otherwise consider?*
On 11/1/2025 6:27 AM, Michael M Pannwitz wrote:
If "larger systemic forces" turn up during an ost event, entered
by a participant of the gathered system in the circle I might
address that person to add his issue on the wall so that the
issue has a name and a time for a breakout session.
In addition to posting issue at the times when folks gather in a
circle (normally gatherings in the morning and in the evening) I
also suggest to post issues at any time. To have
those issues to be visible I suggest to use a different marker
colour (the markers provided in the circle have one color,
usually black or blue, between circles I remove those markers
and provide red marker so that the new issue stands out).
Usually, several issues show up and are posted between
circles... when I see them I ask
the participants in the next circle to introduce it to the whole
crowd).
I myself would not process "the very dynamics we hope to
transform", it would destroy
my main task, namely to do nothing.
The participants are free and able to process stuff.
If they want to deal with the issue "dynamics we hope to
transform", they can and will will
act.
Greetings from Berlin
mmp
Am 01.11.2025 um 09:38 schrieb Tony Budak via OSList:
Hi Michael,
Thanks for your thoughtful clarification. I hear you on the OS
worker’s role and the commitments of the process. My concern
isn’t with the intentions of facilitators, or participants, but
with how larger systemic forces—biases, economic pressures—can
still shape what feels possible in the room. Even in open
formats, those forces don’t disappear. I’m curious to know if
and how you, or other practitioners, have noticed or addressed
this tension in practice.
My question is about how we notice and respond when the process
itself—despite its openness—begins to mirror the very dynamics
we hope to transform. How do we stay awake to that? How do we
design for more profound disruption, not just participation?
I’m grateful for the chance to explore this with you all.
On 11/1/2025 3:42 AM, Michael M Pannwitz via OSList wrote:
Dear Tony,
the usual intention of an os worker is to expand time and
space for the unfolding
of the force of selforganisation.
The os worker does not have intentions on the content of the
os process.
The participants work actionoriented.
The only promises of the ost process are that
--- Every issue of concern to anybody will have been raised,
if they took
responsibility for doing that
--- All issues will have received full discussion, to the
extent desired
--- A full report of issues and discussions will be in the
hands of all
participants
--- Priorities will be set and action plans will be made.
The last has been changed since setting priorities is a
statistical game, the real
game is taking responsibility for the stuff that participants
live for. So folks gather
to work on their projects.
Have a great day
mmp
Am 31.10.2025 um 21:28 schrieb Tony Budak via OSList:
I won’t be able to attend the OST conference in Kenya, but
I’m following along with interest. What I keep wondering is
this: even with the best intentions, does Open Space
sometimes end up reflecting the same biases and profit‑driven
values of the larger system—pulling us back to the status quo
instead of opening the way to real change? I’d love to hear
how others have worked with this tension.
OSList mailing list --everyone@oslist.org
To unsubscribe send an email toeveryone-leave@oslist.org
See the archives here:https://oslist.org/empathy/list/everyone.oslist.org
Michael M Pannwitz
Draisweg 1, 12209 Berlin, Germany
+49 30 7728000mmpannwitz@posteo.de
WOSonOS will be in Kenya in November 6th-8th, 2025, have a look
https://www.wosonos2025.org/
OSList mailing list -- everyone@oslist.org
To unsubscribe send an email to everyone-leave@oslist.org
See the archives here:
https://oslist.org/empathy/list/everyone.oslist.org
OSList mailing list --everyone@oslist.org
To unsubscribe send an email toeveryone-leave@oslist.org
See the archives here:https://oslist.org/empathy/list/everyone.oslist.org
*Beyond Business as Usual: Kenya WOSonOS 2025
A Wake-Up Call for OST Practitioners - Learning to Change, Together*
Friends,
Open Space Technology (OST) has always promised transformation. But
let’s be honest: too often, it’s used to manage change—not to /make/ it.
We gather, we post issues, we talk—and then we return to the same
systems that created the problems we came to solve.
If we’re serious about shifting paradigms, we need to confront the
deeper forces that shape our gatherings before the first circle even
begins. That starts with how we write our invitations.
*Seven Challenges to the Status Quo*
Here are seven provocations—four from *Dorian Cave
<https://madocollective.org/connecting/who.html>*, three from visionary
changemakers—that I believe every OST invitation should wrestle with:
*Dorian Cave’s Four Denials of Modernity-Coloniality:*
1. *Denial of systemic, historical, and ongoing violence*
→ Are we willing to name the harm that shaped our institutions—and
our own complicity in it?
2. *Denial of planetary limits*
→ Are we pretending we can innovate our way out of ecological
collapse without changing how we live?
3. *Denial of entanglement*
→ Are we still acting as if we’re separate individuals, rather than
deeply interdependent?
4. *Denial of the magnitude and complexity of the crisis*
→ Are we shrinking the problem to fit our comfort zone, instead of
expanding our courage?
*Three Provocateurs to Shake the Frame:*
* *Paulo Freire* would ask: /Whose voices are missing, and how are we
reproducing hierarchy even in “open” spaces?/
* *Buckminster Fuller* would ask: /Are we redesigning the system, or
just rearranging the furniture?/
* *Wangari Maathai* would ask: /Where is the Earth in this
conversation? What are we doing to protect life itself?/
*A New Kind of Invitation*
If we want OST to be more than a clever format—if we want it to be a
vessel for paradigm shift—then our invitations must do more than ask,
“What do you care about?” They must ask:
* What truths have we been trained not to see?
* What questions are too dangerous to name?
* What futures are possible if we compost the cultural “stuff” that
keeps us stuck?
Let’s stop pretending that neutrality is safe. Let’s write invitations
that disturb the comfortable and comfort the disturbed.
*OST practitioners, this is your moment.*
You don’t need to copy this word for word—but I invite you to adapt it
boldly, responsibly, and in your own voice. Let it reflect the real
tensions we’re living through. Let it compost the cultural “stuff” that
keeps us stuck. Let it call forth the kind of gathering that Dorian
Cavé,Paulo Freire, Buckminster Fuller, or Wangari Maathai would be proud
to host.
In solidarity—for more fun, joy, love, and less stuff,
*Tony*
On 11/2/2025 10:06 AM, Rain Warren via OSList wrote:
> Michael,
> I LOVE THAT QUESTION! I would even love to attend an Open Space with
> those three in attendance. These questions really made my morning!
> *I asked Ai your question and here are the results:*
>
> That’s a /brilliant/ question — and exactly the kind of reflective
> inquiry those three visionaries would love. Each of them approached
> transformation—of people, systems, and the planet—from profoundly
> different but complementary angles: Freire through *critical
> consciousness*, Fuller through *design and systems thinking*, and
> Maathai through *ecological stewardship and community empowerment*.
>
> Here’s how each might frame /unexpected, deeper questions/ for a
> gathering—questions that reach beyond the obvious and challenge
> participants to think in revolutionary ways.
>
>
> 🐝 *If Paulo Freire Were Hosting: The Pedagogy of Liberation*
>
> Freire would ask questions that awaken *awareness, dialogue, and
> co-creation*.
> He would resist one-way communication and instead invite reflection
> that dismantles hierarchy.
>
> *Questions Freire might ask:*
>
> 1.
>
> /What truths have we been taught to accept without question—and
> what happens if we reimagine them together?/
>
> 2.
>
> /Who is absent from this conversation, and how might their
> presence transform our understanding?/
>
> 3.
>
> /In what ways are we both oppressed and oppressor in the systems
> we inhabit?/
>
> 4.
>
> /How can learning become an act of love and liberation rather than
> control and compliance?/
>
> 5.
>
> /If dialogue itself is a form of action, how might we speak today
> so that freedom grows from our words?/
>
>
> *🦋 If Buckminster Fuller Were Hosting: The Architect of a
> Better Future*
>
> Fuller would push the group to see *humanity as a design
> challenge*—not a problem to fix but a system to evolve.
> His questions would stretch imagination toward *synergy,
> sustainability, and long-range thinking*.
>
> *Questions Fuller might ask:*
>
> 1.
>
> /If our goal were to make the world work for 100% of humanity,
> what assumptions would we need to discard immediately?/
>
> 2.
>
> /What patterns of waste—energy, time, or human potential—can we
> redesign into resources?/
>
> 3.
>
> /How might we use the fewest resources to achieve the greatest
> good for the greatest number?/
>
> 4.
>
> /What would our actions look like if we designed for seven
> generations ahead rather than one fiscal year?/
>
> 5.
>
> /If the universe is inherently regenerative, what might it be
> trying to teach us about balance and efficiency?/
>
>
> *If Wangari Maathai Were Hosting: The Spirit of Replenishment*
>
> Maathai would call the gathering back to *the earth, community, and
> moral courage*.
> Her questions would awaken the *spiritual and ecological
> consciousness* within social change.
>
> *Questions Maathai might ask:*
>
> 1.
>
> /What are we planting—literally and figuratively—that will nourish
> the generations to come?/
>
> 2.
>
> /How can healing the land help us heal ourselves and our societies?/
>
> 3.
>
> /When we speak of progress, whose soil, trees, and rivers pay the
> price?/
>
> 4.
>
> /What courage is required to nurture life in a world that rewards
> destruction?/
>
> 5.
>
> /How can the smallest act—a seed, a gesture, a truth—become a
> revolution of care?/
>
>
>
> On Sun, Nov 2, 2025 at 9:52 AM Michael M Pannwitz via OSList
> <everyone@oslist.org> wrote:
>
> Dear Tony,
>
> "If Paulo Freire, Buckminster Fuller, or Wangari Maathai were
> hosting this gathering, what questions would they ask that we
> might not otherwise consider?"
>
> If they were hosting they would have their say at the beginning of
> the ost event, introduce the facilitator/companion/witness and
> slip into the role of participants.
>
> In that role they would post issues, those might also be
> questions, etc.
> They might also not enter issues but roam as butterflies or bumble
> bees or do both, etc.
> Or leave the event.
> Or leave and think and come back a bit later.
> (I experienced one such participant at a London OSonOS, he was
> terribly nervous,
> left the event, stopped at the next pub, had several beers and
> returned...).
>
> Butterflies simply hang out and often are visited by other
> butterflies to dream, etc.
>
> Bumble bees are those visiting this or that breakout session and
> pollinate without lingering or also stay.
>
> Any "systemic forces" that interest them, can get on the wall.
> If they believe that they will understand "systemic forces" or
> even fumble with systemic
> forces they might be admired or find themselves alone in their
> breakout session.
> The latter is also wonderful:
> Nobody came and I am the only participant that can deal with this
> stuff.
> Unless a bumble bee visits, the participant has all the time and
> can write
> a beautiful or not page for the final paper.
>
> Here are 3 utterings of the three folks you mentioned
> "Nobody knows everything, but nobody knows nothing."
> "Call me Trimtab"
> "We all need to work hard to make a difference in our
> neighborhoods, regions, and countries, and in the world as a
> whole. That means making sure we work hard, collaborate, and make
> ourselves better agents to change."
>
> The author of the 3rd quote is from Kenya.
> I would not be surprised if her spirit would wave through the
> WOSonOS starting
> in 4 days.
>
> Greetings from a wonderful fall day in Berlin
> mmp
>
> Am 01.11.2025 um 21:19 schrieb Tony Budak:
>>
>> Thanks for clarifying the facilitator’s role and the value of
>> “doing nothing” in terms of content. My concern is that not all
>> systemic forces show up as issues on the wall. They often shape
>> who speaks, whose ideas stick, and what gets treated as “real
>> work.” If we only respond when someone names it, we risk letting
>> those forces quietly steer us back to the status quo.
>>
>> So here’s my provocation: *If Paulo Freire, Buckminster Fuller,
>> or Wangari Maathai were hosting this gathering, what questions
>> would they ask that we might not otherwise consider?*
>>
>>
>> On 11/1/2025 6:27 AM, Michael M Pannwitz wrote:
>>> If "larger systemic forces" turn up during an ost event, entered
>>> by a participant of the gathered system in the circle I might
>>> address that person to add his issue on the wall so that the
>>> issue has a name and a time for a breakout session.
>>> In addition to posting issue at the times when folks gather in a
>>> circle (normally gatherings in the morning and in the evening) I
>>> also suggest to post issues at any time. To have
>>> those issues to be visible I suggest to use a different marker
>>> colour (the markers provided in the circle have one color,
>>> usually black or blue, between circles I remove those markers
>>> and provide red marker so that the new issue stands out).
>>> Usually, several issues show up and are posted between
>>> circles... when I see them I ask
>>> the participants in the next circle to introduce it to the whole
>>> crowd).
>>>
>>> I myself would not process "the very dynamics we hope to
>>> transform", it would destroy
>>> my main task, namely to do nothing.
>>> The participants are free and able to process stuff.
>>> If they want to deal with the issue "dynamics we hope to
>>> transform", they can and will will
>>> act.
>>>
>>>
>>> Greetings from Berlin
>>> mmp
>>>
>>>
>>> Am 01.11.2025 um 09:38 schrieb Tony Budak via OSList:
>>>>
>>>> Hi Michael,
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for your thoughtful clarification. I hear you on the OS
>>>> worker’s role and the commitments of the process. My concern
>>>> isn’t with the intentions of facilitators, or participants, but
>>>> with how larger systemic forces—biases, economic pressures—can
>>>> still shape what feels possible in the room. Even in open
>>>> formats, those forces don’t disappear. I’m curious to know if
>>>> and how you, or other practitioners, have noticed or addressed
>>>> this tension in practice.
>>>>
>>>> My question is about how we notice and respond when the process
>>>> itself—despite its openness—begins to mirror the very dynamics
>>>> we hope to transform. How do we stay awake to that? How do we
>>>> design for more profound disruption, not just participation?
>>>>
>>>> I’m grateful for the chance to explore this with you all.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 11/1/2025 3:42 AM, Michael M Pannwitz via OSList wrote:
>>>>> Dear Tony,
>>>>>
>>>>> the usual intention of an os worker is to expand time and
>>>>> space for the unfolding
>>>>> of the force of selforganisation.
>>>>> The os worker does not have intentions on the content of the
>>>>> os process.
>>>>> The participants work actionoriented.
>>>>>
>>>>> The only promises of the ost process are that
>>>>>
>>>>> --- Every issue of concern to anybody will have been raised,
>>>>> if they took
>>>>> responsibility for doing that
>>>>> --- All issues will have received full discussion, to the
>>>>> extent desired
>>>>> --- A full report of issues and discussions will be in the
>>>>> hands of all
>>>>> participants
>>>>> --- Priorities will be set and action plans will be made.
>>>>>
>>>>> The last has been changed since setting priorities is a
>>>>> statistical game, the real
>>>>> game is taking responsibility for the stuff that participants
>>>>> live for. So folks gather
>>>>> to work on their projects.
>>>>>
>>>>> Have a great day
>>>>> mmp
>>>>>
>>>>> Am 31.10.2025 um 21:28 schrieb Tony Budak via OSList:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I won’t be able to attend the OST conference in Kenya, but
>>>>>> I’m following along with interest. What I keep wondering is
>>>>>> this: even with the best intentions, does Open Space
>>>>>> sometimes end up reflecting the same biases and profit‑driven
>>>>>> values of the larger system—pulling us back to the status quo
>>>>>> instead of opening the way to real change? I’d love to hear
>>>>>> how others have worked with this tension.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> OSList mailing list --everyone@oslist.org
>>>>>> To unsubscribe send an email toeveryone-leave@oslist.org
>>>>>> See the archives here:https://oslist.org/empathy/list/everyone.oslist.org
>>>>>
>>>
>
> Michael M Pannwitz
> Draisweg 1, 12209 Berlin, Germany
> +49 30 7728000mmpannwitz@posteo.de
>
> WOSonOS will be in Kenya in November 6th-8th, 2025, have a look
> https://www.wosonos2025.org/
>
> OSList mailing list -- everyone@oslist.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to everyone-leave@oslist.org
> See the archives here:
> https://oslist.org/empathy/list/everyone.oslist.org
>
>
> OSList mailing list --everyone@oslist.org
> To unsubscribe send an email toeveryone-leave@oslist.org
> See the archives here:https://oslist.org/empathy/list/everyone.oslist.org
--
In Solidarity for more joy, and less stuff,
*Tony*
Click HERE to Meet with Tony <https://bit.ly/3WtAIgT>
MH
Michael Herman
Mon, Nov 3, 2025 5:03 PM
When I am the sponsor of an open space event, these questions might be
interesting as I'm thinking about what I want to write into my
invitation... but it's most important that I invite what I and my friends,
neighbors, colleagues, etc. want to explore, not what any of these other
folks might want to explore. When I'm working with someone else, or a
group, as sponsor, I'm there for their question, their invitation, their
future, not the future any of these luminaries envisioned. Unless I'm
working for the Fuller Institute or something like that. Rather than
bringing these other agendas to my work in open space, limiting it,
trying to direct it, trying to improve it, make it more powerful, and so
on... all of which are imposing my views and desires on sponsors and
participants... I might suggest Donnella Meadows' "Places to intervene in
the system."
The list and explanations available here:
https://donellameadows.org/archives/leverage-points-places-to-intervene-in-a-system/
...on wikipedia, and elsewhere on the web arose spontaneously from in a
conference conversation, a question arose, Meadows jumped up and grabbed a
marker and scribbled a list... and then through others notes and her
further reflections, several versions emerged over the next little while.
So you'll find different versions out there. But what the list offers is
perhaps, in your terms, Tony, some definition of "real" change. The list
basically says you can get some change by fiddling with this or that
feedback loop, but you can get more change fiddling with the goals of the
system.
If anyone wants to invite more change, "real" change, in any system, this
list suggests where to look, how to wrap words into questions, and invite
engagement by participants at levels they might not normally be thinking
about and questioning. It's a list of progressively bigger, broader ways
to invite people to explore the desired future(s) of their system. It's
still possible to make reaching for higher levels of leverage an agenda we
might inadvertently impose on a system, but I think it's more likely to
invite depth than impose it. To the extent that most OS invitations and
stories I can think of seem to be working at the higher end of the list,
closer to "goals of the system" than "changing the parameters and numbers,"
(HHO's Taxi Wars story comes to mind... where they wanted to "stop the taxi
drivers from shooting at each other" and HHO suggested "the future of
transportation in johannesburg") ...to the extent we stretch in similar
directions, inviting focus on higher level places to intervene in whatever
is happening in the system... we're already knowing and using these
levels. Donnella just gives us a cheat sheet or checklist, toward inviting
more "real" change, more ease, more speed, etc.
ANd... love your energy, Rain... I'm dabbling with these AI models,
myself... but now you have me wondering: Artificial Intelligence and
Genuine Community - Issues and Opportunities?
m
--
Michael Herman
Michael Herman Associates
312-280-7838 (mobile)
MichaelHerman.com
OpenSpaceWorld.org
On Mon, Nov 3, 2025 at 9:08 AM Tony Budak via OSList everyone@oslist.org
wrote:
Beyond Business as Usual: Kenya WOSonOS 2025 A Wake-Up Call for OST
Practitioners - Learning to Change, Together
Friends,
Open Space Technology (OST) has always promised transformation. But let’s
be honest: too often, it’s used to manage change—not to make it. We
gather, we post issues, we talk—and then we return to the same systems that
created the problems we came to solve.
If we’re serious about shifting paradigms, we need to confront the deeper
forces that shape our gatherings before the first circle even begins. That
starts with how we write our invitations.
Seven Challenges to the Status Quo
Here are seven provocations—four from Dorian Cave
https://madocollective.org/connecting/who.html, three from visionary
changemakers—that I believe every OST invitation should wrestle with:
Dorian Cave’s Four Denials of Modernity-Coloniality:
1. *Denial of systemic, historical, and ongoing violence*
→ Are we willing to name the harm that shaped our institutions—and our
own complicity in it?
2. *Denial of planetary limits*
→ Are we pretending we can innovate our way out of ecological collapse
without changing how we live?
3. *Denial of entanglement*
→ Are we still acting as if we’re separate individuals, rather than
deeply interdependent?
4. *Denial of the magnitude and complexity of the crisis*
→ Are we shrinking the problem to fit our comfort zone, instead of
expanding our courage?
Three Provocateurs to Shake the Frame:
- *Paulo Freire* would ask: *Whose voices are missing, and how are we
reproducing hierarchy even in “open” spaces?*
- *Buckminster Fuller* would ask: *Are we redesigning the system, or
just rearranging the furniture?*
- *Wangari Maathai* would ask: *Where is the Earth in this
conversation? What are we doing to protect life itself?*
A New Kind of Invitation
If we want OST to be more than a clever format—if we want it to be a
vessel for paradigm shift—then our invitations must do more than ask, “What
do you care about?” They must ask:
- What truths have we been trained not to see?
- What questions are too dangerous to name?
- What futures are possible if we compost the cultural “stuff” that
keeps us stuck?
Let’s stop pretending that neutrality is safe. Let’s write invitations
that disturb the comfortable and comfort the disturbed.
OST practitioners, this is your moment.
You don’t need to copy this word for word—but I invite you to adapt it
boldly, responsibly, and in your own voice. Let it reflect the real
tensions we’re living through. Let it compost the cultural “stuff” that
keeps us stuck. Let it call forth the kind of gathering that Dorian Cavé,
Paulo Freire, Buckminster Fuller, or Wangari Maathai would be proud to
host.
In solidarity—for more fun, joy, love, and less stuff,
Tony
On 11/2/2025 10:06 AM, Rain Warren via OSList wrote:
Michael,
I LOVE THAT QUESTION! I would even love to attend an Open Space with those
three in attendance. These questions really made my morning!
I asked Ai your question and here are the results:
That’s a brilliant question — and exactly the kind of reflective
inquiry those three visionaries would love. Each of them approached
transformation—of people, systems, and the planet—from profoundly different
but complementary angles: Freire through critical consciousness, Fuller
through design and systems thinking, and Maathai through ecological
stewardship and community empowerment.
Here’s how each might frame unexpected, deeper questions for a
gathering—questions that reach beyond the obvious and challenge
participants to think in revolutionary ways.
🐝 If Paulo Freire Were Hosting: The Pedagogy of Liberation
Freire would ask questions that awaken awareness, dialogue, and
co-creation.
He would resist one-way communication and instead invite reflection that
dismantles hierarchy.
Questions Freire might ask:
1.
*What truths have we been taught to accept without question—and what
happens if we reimagine them together?*
2.
*Who is absent from this conversation, and how might their presence
transform our understanding?*
3.
*In what ways are we both oppressed and oppressor in the systems we
inhabit?*
4.
*How can learning become an act of love and liberation rather than
control and compliance?*
5.
*If dialogue itself is a form of action, how might we speak today so
that freedom grows from our words?*
🦋 If Buckminster Fuller Were Hosting: The Architect of a Better Future
Fuller would push the group to see humanity as a design challenge—not a
problem to fix but a system to evolve.
His questions would stretch imagination toward synergy, sustainability,
and long-range thinking.
Questions Fuller might ask:
1.
*If our goal were to make the world work for 100% of humanity, what
assumptions would we need to discard immediately?*
2.
*What patterns of waste—energy, time, or human potential—can we
redesign into resources?*
3.
*How might we use the fewest resources to achieve the greatest good
for the greatest number?*
4.
*What would our actions look like if we designed for seven generations
ahead rather than one fiscal year?*
5.
*If the universe is inherently regenerative, what might it be trying
to teach us about balance and efficiency?*
If Wangari Maathai Were Hosting: The Spirit of Replenishment
Maathai would call the gathering back to the earth, community, and moral
courage.
Her questions would awaken the spiritual and ecological consciousness
within social change.
Questions Maathai might ask:
1.
*What are we planting—literally and figuratively—that will nourish the
generations to come?*
2.
*How can healing the land help us heal ourselves and our societies?*
3.
*When we speak of progress, whose soil, trees, and rivers pay the
price?*
4.
*What courage is required to nurture life in a world that rewards
destruction?*
5.
*How can the smallest act—a seed, a gesture, a truth—become a
revolution of care?*
On Sun, Nov 2, 2025 at 9:52 AM Michael M Pannwitz via OSList <
everyone@oslist.org> wrote:
Dear Tony,
"If Paulo Freire, Buckminster Fuller, or Wangari Maathai were hosting
this gathering, what questions would they ask that we might not otherwise
consider?"
If they were hosting they would have their say at the beginning of the
ost event, introduce the facilitator/companion/witness and slip into the
role of participants.
In that role they would post issues, those might also be questions, etc.
They might also not enter issues but roam as butterflies or bumble bees
or do both, etc.
Or leave the event.
Or leave and think and come back a bit later.
(I experienced one such participant at a London OSonOS, he was terribly
nervous,
left the event, stopped at the next pub, had several beers and
returned...).
Butterflies simply hang out and often are visited by other butterflies to
dream, etc.
Bumble bees are those visiting this or that breakout session and
pollinate without lingering or also stay.
Any "systemic forces" that interest them, can get on the wall.
If they believe that they will understand "systemic forces" or even
fumble with systemic
forces they might be admired or find themselves alone in their breakout
session.
The latter is also wonderful:
Nobody came and I am the only participant that can deal with this stuff.
Unless a bumble bee visits, the participant has all the time and can write
a beautiful or not page for the final paper.
Here are 3 utterings of the three folks you mentioned
"Nobody knows everything, but nobody knows nothing."
"Call me Trimtab"
"We all need to work hard to make a difference in our neighborhoods,
regions, and countries, and in the world as a whole. That means making sure
we work hard, collaborate, and make ourselves better agents to change."
The author of the 3rd quote is from Kenya.
I would not be surprised if her spirit would wave through the WOSonOS
starting
in 4 days.
Greetings from a wonderful fall day in Berlin
mmp
Am 01.11.2025 um 21:19 schrieb Tony Budak:
Thanks for clarifying the facilitator’s role and the value of “doing
nothing” in terms of content. My concern is that not all systemic forces
show up as issues on the wall. They often shape who speaks, whose ideas
stick, and what gets treated as “real work.” If we only respond when
someone names it, we risk letting those forces quietly steer us back to the
status quo.
So here’s my provocation: If Paulo Freire, Buckminster Fuller, or
Wangari Maathai were hosting this gathering, what questions would they ask
that we might not otherwise consider?
On 11/1/2025 6:27 AM, Michael M Pannwitz wrote:
If "larger systemic forces" turn up during an ost event, entered by a
participant of the gathered system in the circle I might address that
person to add his issue on the wall so that the issue has a name and a time
for a breakout session.
In addition to posting issue at the times when folks gather in a circle
(normally gatherings in the morning and in the evening) I also suggest to
post issues at any time. To have
those issues to be visible I suggest to use a different marker colour
(the markers provided in the circle have one color, usually black or blue,
between circles I remove those markers and provide red marker so that the
new issue stands out).
Usually, several issues show up and are posted between circles... when I
see them I ask
the participants in the next circle to introduce it to the whole crowd).
I myself would not process "the very dynamics we hope to transform", it
would destroy
my main task, namely to do nothing.
The participants are free and able to process stuff.
If they want to deal with the issue "dynamics we hope to transform", they
can and will will
act.
Greetings from Berlin
mmp
Am 01.11.2025 um 09:38 schrieb Tony Budak via OSList:
Hi Michael,
Thanks for your thoughtful clarification. I hear you on the OS worker’s
role and the commitments of the process. My concern isn’t with the
intentions of facilitators, or participants, but with how larger systemic
forces—biases, economic pressures—can still shape what feels possible in
the room. Even in open formats, those forces don’t disappear. I’m curious
to know if and how you, or other practitioners, have noticed or addressed
this tension in practice.
My question is about how we notice and respond when the process
itself—despite its openness—begins to mirror the very dynamics we hope to
transform. How do we stay awake to that? How do we design for more profound
disruption, not just participation?
I’m grateful for the chance to explore this with you all.
On 11/1/2025 3:42 AM, Michael M Pannwitz via OSList wrote:
Dear Tony,
the usual intention of an os worker is to expand time and space for the
unfolding
of the force of selforganisation.
The os worker does not have intentions on the content of the os process.
The participants work actionoriented.
The only promises of the ost process are that
--- Every issue of concern to anybody will have been raised, if they took
responsibility for doing that
--- All issues will have received full discussion, to the extent desired
--- A full report of issues and discussions will be in the hands of all
participants
--- Priorities will be set and action plans will be made.
The last has been changed since setting priorities is a statistical game,
the real
game is taking responsibility for the stuff that participants live for.
So folks gather
to work on their projects.
Have a great day
mmp
Am 31.10.2025 um 21:28 schrieb Tony Budak via OSList:
I won’t be able to attend the OST conference in Kenya, but I’m following
along with interest. What I keep wondering is this: even with the best
intentions, does Open Space sometimes end up reflecting the same biases and
profit‑driven values of the larger system—pulling us back to the status quo
instead of opening the way to real change? I’d love to hear how others have
worked with this tension.
OSList mailing list -- everyone@oslist.org
To unsubscribe send an email to everyone-leave@oslist.org
See the archives here: https://oslist.org/empathy/list/everyone.oslist.org
Michael M Pannwitz
Draisweg 1, 12209 Berlin, Germany
+49 30 7728000 mmpannwitz@posteo.de
WOSonOS will be in Kenya in November 6th-8th, 2025, have a lookhttps://www.wosonos2025.org/
OSList mailing list -- everyone@oslist.org
To unsubscribe send an email to everyone-leave@oslist.org
See the archives here:
https://oslist.org/empathy/list/everyone.oslist.org
When *I* am the sponsor of an open space event, these questions might be
interesting as I'm thinking about what I want to write into my
invitation... but it's most important that I invite what I and my friends,
neighbors, colleagues, etc. want to explore, not what any of these other
folks might want to explore. When I'm working with someone else, or a
group, as sponsor, I'm there for their question, their invitation, their
future, not the future any of these luminaries envisioned. Unless I'm
working for the Fuller Institute or something like that. Rather than
bringing these other *agendas* to my work in open space, limiting it,
trying to direct it, trying to improve it, make it more powerful, and so
on... all of which are imposing my views and desires on sponsors and
participants... I might suggest Donnella Meadows' "Places to intervene in
the system."
The list and explanations available here:
https://donellameadows.org/archives/leverage-points-places-to-intervene-in-a-system/
...on wikipedia, and elsewhere on the web arose spontaneously from in a
conference conversation, a question arose, Meadows jumped up and grabbed a
marker and scribbled a list... and then through others notes and her
further reflections, several versions emerged over the next little while.
So you'll find different versions out there. But what the list offers is
perhaps, in your terms, Tony, some definition of "real" change. The list
basically says you can get some change by fiddling with this or that
feedback loop, but you can get *more* change fiddling with the goals of the
system.
If anyone wants to invite *more* change, "real" change, in any system, this
list suggests where to look, how to wrap words into questions, and invite
engagement by participants at levels they might not normally be thinking
about and questioning. It's a list of progressively *bigger, broader* ways
to invite people to explore the desired future(s) of their system. It's
still possible to make reaching for higher levels of leverage an agenda we
might inadvertently impose on a system, but I think it's more likely to
invite depth than impose it. To the extent that most OS invitations and
stories I can think of seem to be working at the higher end of the list,
closer to "goals of the system" than "changing the parameters and numbers,"
(HHO's Taxi Wars story comes to mind... where they wanted to "stop the taxi
drivers from shooting at each other" and HHO suggested "the future of
transportation in johannesburg") ...to the extent we stretch in similar
directions, inviting focus on higher level places to intervene in whatever
is happening in the system... we're already knowing and using these
levels. Donnella just gives us a cheat sheet or checklist, toward inviting
more "real" change, more ease, more speed, etc.
ANd... love your energy, Rain... I'm dabbling with these AI models,
myself... but now you have me wondering: Artificial Intelligence and
Genuine Community - Issues and Opportunities?
m
--
Michael Herman
Michael Herman Associates
312-280-7838 (mobile)
MichaelHerman.com
OpenSpaceWorld.org
On Mon, Nov 3, 2025 at 9:08 AM Tony Budak via OSList <everyone@oslist.org>
wrote:
>
> *Beyond Business as Usual: Kenya WOSonOS 2025 A Wake-Up Call for OST
> Practitioners - Learning to Change, Together*
>
> Friends,
>
> Open Space Technology (OST) has always promised transformation. But let’s
> be honest: too often, it’s used to manage change—not to *make* it. We
> gather, we post issues, we talk—and then we return to the same systems that
> created the problems we came to solve.
>
> If we’re serious about shifting paradigms, we need to confront the deeper
> forces that shape our gatherings before the first circle even begins. That
> starts with how we write our invitations.
>
> *Seven Challenges to the Status Quo*
>
> Here are seven provocations—four from *Dorian Cave
> <https://madocollective.org/connecting/who.html>*, three from visionary
> changemakers—that I believe every OST invitation should wrestle with:
>
> *Dorian Cave’s Four Denials of Modernity-Coloniality:*
>
> 1. *Denial of systemic, historical, and ongoing violence*
> → Are we willing to name the harm that shaped our institutions—and our
> own complicity in it?
> 2. *Denial of planetary limits*
> → Are we pretending we can innovate our way out of ecological collapse
> without changing how we live?
> 3. *Denial of entanglement*
> → Are we still acting as if we’re separate individuals, rather than
> deeply interdependent?
> 4. *Denial of the magnitude and complexity of the crisis*
> → Are we shrinking the problem to fit our comfort zone, instead of
> expanding our courage?
>
> *Three Provocateurs to Shake the Frame:*
>
> - *Paulo Freire* would ask: *Whose voices are missing, and how are we
> reproducing hierarchy even in “open” spaces?*
> - *Buckminster Fuller* would ask: *Are we redesigning the system, or
> just rearranging the furniture?*
> - *Wangari Maathai* would ask: *Where is the Earth in this
> conversation? What are we doing to protect life itself?*
>
> *A New Kind of Invitation*
>
> If we want OST to be more than a clever format—if we want it to be a
> vessel for paradigm shift—then our invitations must do more than ask, “What
> do you care about?” They must ask:
>
> - What truths have we been trained not to see?
> - What questions are too dangerous to name?
> - What futures are possible if we compost the cultural “stuff” that
> keeps us stuck?
>
> Let’s stop pretending that neutrality is safe. Let’s write invitations
> that disturb the comfortable and comfort the disturbed.
>
> *OST practitioners, this is your moment.*
> You don’t need to copy this word for word—but I invite you to adapt it
> boldly, responsibly, and in your own voice. Let it reflect the real
> tensions we’re living through. Let it compost the cultural “stuff” that
> keeps us stuck. Let it call forth the kind of gathering that Dorian Cavé,
> Paulo Freire, Buckminster Fuller, or Wangari Maathai would be proud to
> host.
>
> In solidarity—for more fun, joy, love, and less stuff,
> *Tony*
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 11/2/2025 10:06 AM, Rain Warren via OSList wrote:
>
> Michael,
> I LOVE THAT QUESTION! I would even love to attend an Open Space with those
> three in attendance. These questions really made my morning!
> *I asked Ai your question and here are the results:*
>
> That’s a *brilliant* question — and exactly the kind of reflective
> inquiry those three visionaries would love. Each of them approached
> transformation—of people, systems, and the planet—from profoundly different
> but complementary angles: Freire through *critical consciousness*, Fuller
> through *design and systems thinking*, and Maathai through *ecological
> stewardship and community empowerment*.
>
> Here’s how each might frame *unexpected, deeper questions* for a
> gathering—questions that reach beyond the obvious and challenge
> participants to think in revolutionary ways.
> 🐝 *If Paulo Freire Were Hosting: The Pedagogy of Liberation*
>
> Freire would ask questions that awaken *awareness, dialogue, and
> co-creation*.
> He would resist one-way communication and instead invite reflection that
> dismantles hierarchy.
>
> *Questions Freire might ask:*
>
> 1.
>
> *What truths have we been taught to accept without question—and what
> happens if we reimagine them together?*
> 2.
>
> *Who is absent from this conversation, and how might their presence
> transform our understanding?*
> 3.
>
> *In what ways are we both oppressed and oppressor in the systems we
> inhabit?*
> 4.
>
> *How can learning become an act of love and liberation rather than
> control and compliance?*
> 5.
>
> *If dialogue itself is a form of action, how might we speak today so
> that freedom grows from our words?*
>
> *🦋 If Buckminster Fuller Were Hosting: The Architect of a Better Future*
>
> Fuller would push the group to see *humanity as a design challenge*—not a
> problem to fix but a system to evolve.
> His questions would stretch imagination toward *synergy, sustainability,
> and long-range thinking*.
>
> *Questions Fuller might ask:*
>
> 1.
>
> *If our goal were to make the world work for 100% of humanity, what
> assumptions would we need to discard immediately?*
> 2.
>
> *What patterns of waste—energy, time, or human potential—can we
> redesign into resources?*
> 3.
>
> *How might we use the fewest resources to achieve the greatest good
> for the greatest number?*
> 4.
>
> *What would our actions look like if we designed for seven generations
> ahead rather than one fiscal year?*
> 5.
>
> *If the universe is inherently regenerative, what might it be trying
> to teach us about balance and efficiency?*
>
> *If Wangari Maathai Were Hosting: The Spirit of Replenishment*
>
> Maathai would call the gathering back to *the earth, community, and moral
> courage*.
> Her questions would awaken the *spiritual and ecological consciousness*
> within social change.
>
> *Questions Maathai might ask:*
>
> 1.
>
> *What are we planting—literally and figuratively—that will nourish the
> generations to come?*
> 2.
>
> *How can healing the land help us heal ourselves and our societies?*
> 3.
>
> *When we speak of progress, whose soil, trees, and rivers pay the
> price?*
> 4.
>
> *What courage is required to nurture life in a world that rewards
> destruction?*
> 5.
>
> *How can the smallest act—a seed, a gesture, a truth—become a
> revolution of care?*
>
>
>
> On Sun, Nov 2, 2025 at 9:52 AM Michael M Pannwitz via OSList <
> everyone@oslist.org> wrote:
>
>> Dear Tony,
>>
>> "If Paulo Freire, Buckminster Fuller, or Wangari Maathai were hosting
>> this gathering, what questions would they ask that we might not otherwise
>> consider?"
>>
>> If they were hosting they would have their say at the beginning of the
>> ost event, introduce the facilitator/companion/witness and slip into the
>> role of participants.
>>
>> In that role they would post issues, those might also be questions, etc.
>> They might also not enter issues but roam as butterflies or bumble bees
>> or do both, etc.
>> Or leave the event.
>> Or leave and think and come back a bit later.
>> (I experienced one such participant at a London OSonOS, he was terribly
>> nervous,
>> left the event, stopped at the next pub, had several beers and
>> returned...).
>>
>> Butterflies simply hang out and often are visited by other butterflies to
>> dream, etc.
>>
>> Bumble bees are those visiting this or that breakout session and
>> pollinate without lingering or also stay.
>>
>> Any "systemic forces" that interest them, can get on the wall.
>> If they believe that they will understand "systemic forces" or even
>> fumble with systemic
>> forces they might be admired or find themselves alone in their breakout
>> session.
>> The latter is also wonderful:
>> Nobody came and I am the only participant that can deal with this stuff.
>> Unless a bumble bee visits, the participant has all the time and can write
>> a beautiful or not page for the final paper.
>>
>> Here are 3 utterings of the three folks you mentioned
>> "Nobody knows everything, but nobody knows nothing."
>> "Call me Trimtab"
>> "We all need to work hard to make a difference in our neighborhoods,
>> regions, and countries, and in the world as a whole. That means making sure
>> we work hard, collaborate, and make ourselves better agents to change."
>>
>> The author of the 3rd quote is from Kenya.
>> I would not be surprised if her spirit would wave through the WOSonOS
>> starting
>> in 4 days.
>>
>> Greetings from a wonderful fall day in Berlin
>> mmp
>>
>> Am 01.11.2025 um 21:19 schrieb Tony Budak:
>>
>> Thanks for clarifying the facilitator’s role and the value of “doing
>> nothing” in terms of content. My concern is that not all systemic forces
>> show up as issues on the wall. They often shape who speaks, whose ideas
>> stick, and what gets treated as “real work.” If we only respond when
>> someone names it, we risk letting those forces quietly steer us back to the
>> status quo.
>>
>> So here’s my provocation: *If Paulo Freire, Buckminster Fuller, or
>> Wangari Maathai were hosting this gathering, what questions would they ask
>> that we might not otherwise consider?*
>>
>>
>> On 11/1/2025 6:27 AM, Michael M Pannwitz wrote:
>>
>> If "larger systemic forces" turn up during an ost event, entered by a
>> participant of the gathered system in the circle I might address that
>> person to add his issue on the wall so that the issue has a name and a time
>> for a breakout session.
>> In addition to posting issue at the times when folks gather in a circle
>> (normally gatherings in the morning and in the evening) I also suggest to
>> post issues at any time. To have
>> those issues to be visible I suggest to use a different marker colour
>> (the markers provided in the circle have one color, usually black or blue,
>> between circles I remove those markers and provide red marker so that the
>> new issue stands out).
>> Usually, several issues show up and are posted between circles... when I
>> see them I ask
>> the participants in the next circle to introduce it to the whole crowd).
>>
>> I myself would not process "the very dynamics we hope to transform", it
>> would destroy
>> my main task, namely to do nothing.
>> The participants are free and able to process stuff.
>> If they want to deal with the issue "dynamics we hope to transform", they
>> can and will will
>> act.
>>
>>
>> Greetings from Berlin
>> mmp
>>
>>
>> Am 01.11.2025 um 09:38 schrieb Tony Budak via OSList:
>>
>> Hi Michael,
>>
>> Thanks for your thoughtful clarification. I hear you on the OS worker’s
>> role and the commitments of the process. My concern isn’t with the
>> intentions of facilitators, or participants, but with how larger systemic
>> forces—biases, economic pressures—can still shape what feels possible in
>> the room. Even in open formats, those forces don’t disappear. I’m curious
>> to know if and how you, or other practitioners, have noticed or addressed
>> this tension in practice.
>>
>> My question is about how we notice and respond when the process
>> itself—despite its openness—begins to mirror the very dynamics we hope to
>> transform. How do we stay awake to that? How do we design for more profound
>> disruption, not just participation?
>>
>> I’m grateful for the chance to explore this with you all.
>>
>>
>> On 11/1/2025 3:42 AM, Michael M Pannwitz via OSList wrote:
>>
>> Dear Tony,
>>
>> the usual intention of an os worker is to expand time and space for the
>> unfolding
>> of the force of selforganisation.
>> The os worker does not have intentions on the content of the os process.
>> The participants work actionoriented.
>>
>> The only promises of the ost process are that
>>
>> --- Every issue of concern to anybody will have been raised, if they took
>> responsibility for doing that
>> --- All issues will have received full discussion, to the extent desired
>> --- A full report of issues and discussions will be in the hands of all
>> participants
>> --- Priorities will be set and action plans will be made.
>>
>> The last has been changed since setting priorities is a statistical game,
>> the real
>> game is taking responsibility for the stuff that participants live for.
>> So folks gather
>> to work on their projects.
>>
>> Have a great day
>> mmp
>>
>> Am 31.10.2025 um 21:28 schrieb Tony Budak via OSList:
>>
>> I won’t be able to attend the OST conference in Kenya, but I’m following
>> along with interest. What I keep wondering is this: even with the best
>> intentions, does Open Space sometimes end up reflecting the same biases and
>> profit‑driven values of the larger system—pulling us back to the status quo
>> instead of opening the way to real change? I’d love to hear how others have
>> worked with this tension.
>>
>> OSList mailing list -- everyone@oslist.org
>> To unsubscribe send an email to everyone-leave@oslist.org
>> See the archives here: https://oslist.org/empathy/list/everyone.oslist.org
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Michael M Pannwitz
>> Draisweg 1, 12209 Berlin, Germany
>> +49 30 7728000 mmpannwitz@posteo.de
>>
>> WOSonOS will be in Kenya in November 6th-8th, 2025, have a lookhttps://www.wosonos2025.org/
>>
>> OSList mailing list -- everyone@oslist.org
>> To unsubscribe send an email to everyone-leave@oslist.org
>> See the archives here:
>> https://oslist.org/empathy/list/everyone.oslist.org
>
>
> OSList mailing list -- everyone@oslist.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to everyone-leave@oslist.org
> See the archives here: https://oslist.org/empathy/list/everyone.oslist.org
>
> --
>
> In Solidarity for more joy, and less stuff,
> *Tony*
> Click HERE to Meet with Tony <https://bit.ly/3WtAIgT>
> OSList mailing list -- everyone@oslist.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to everyone-leave@oslist.org
> See the archives here: https://oslist.org/empathy/list/everyone.oslist.org
MM
Michael M Pannwitz
Mon, Nov 3, 2025 5:15 PM
Dear Tony,
Open Space Technology has never promised transformation.
What we promise are very simple things that rarely appear in gatherings.
Those simple things that we can promise expand time and space for the
unfolding of the force of selforganisation, a bit at a time, at least.
We control nothing.
Control is the number one enemy.
The invitation to a gathering in the ost format is produced in the
Planning Group
organized by the host of the event.
There are effective approaches for Planning Groups to reach grand
invitations.
Have a great day
mmp
Am 03.11.2025 um 17:06 schrieb Tony Budak via OSList:
Beyond Business as Usual: Kenya WOSonOS 2025
A Wake-Up Call for OST Practitioners - Learning to Change, Together
Friends,
Open Space Technology (OST) has always promised transformation. But
let’s be honest: too often, it’s used to manage change—not to /make/
it. We gather, we post issues, we talk—and then we return to the same
systems that created the problems we came to solve.
If we’re serious about shifting paradigms, we need to confront the
deeper forces that shape our gatherings before the first circle even
begins. That starts with how we write our invitations.
Seven Challenges to the Status Quo
Here are seven provocations—four from Dorian Cave
https://madocollective.org/connecting/who.html, three from
visionary changemakers—that I believe every OST invitation should
wrestle with:
Dorian Cave’s Four Denials of Modernity-Coloniality:
-
Denial of systemic, historical, and ongoing violence
→ Are we willing to name the harm that shaped our institutions—and
our own complicity in it?
-
Denial of planetary limits
→ Are we pretending we can innovate our way out of ecological
collapse without changing how we live?
-
Denial of entanglement
→ Are we still acting as if we’re separate individuals, rather
than deeply interdependent?
-
Denial of the magnitude and complexity of the crisis
→ Are we shrinking the problem to fit our comfort zone, instead of
expanding our courage?
Three Provocateurs to Shake the Frame:
-
Paulo Freire would ask: /Whose voices are missing, and how are
we reproducing hierarchy even in “open” spaces?/
-
Buckminster Fuller would ask: /Are we redesigning the system, or
just rearranging the furniture?/
-
Wangari Maathai would ask: /Where is the Earth in this
conversation? What are we doing to protect life itself?/
A New Kind of Invitation
If we want OST to be more than a clever format—if we want it to be a
vessel for paradigm shift—then our invitations must do more than ask,
“What do you care about?” They must ask:
- What truths have we been trained not to see?
- What questions are too dangerous to name?
- What futures are possible if we compost the cultural “stuff” that
keeps us stuck?
Let’s stop pretending that neutrality is safe. Let’s write invitations
that disturb the comfortable and comfort the disturbed.
OST practitioners, this is your moment.
You don’t need to copy this word for word—but I invite you to adapt it
boldly, responsibly, and in your own voice. Let it reflect the real
tensions we’re living through. Let it compost the cultural “stuff”
that keeps us stuck. Let it call forth the kind of gathering that
Dorian Cavé,Paulo Freire, Buckminster Fuller, or Wangari Maathai would
be proud to host.
In solidarity—for more fun, joy, love, and less stuff,
Tony
On 11/2/2025 10:06 AM, Rain Warren via OSList wrote:
Michael,
I LOVE THAT QUESTION! I would even love to attend an Open Space with
those three in attendance. These questions really made my morning!
I asked Ai your question and here are the results:
That’s a /brilliant/ question — and exactly the kind of reflective
inquiry those three visionaries would love. Each of them approached
transformation—of people, systems, and the planet—from profoundly
different but complementary angles: Freire through critical
consciousness, Fuller through design and systems thinking, and
Maathai through ecological stewardship and community empowerment.
Here’s how each might frame /unexpected, deeper questions/ for a
gathering—questions that reach beyond the obvious and challenge
participants to think in revolutionary ways.
🐝 *If Paulo Freire Were Hosting: The Pedagogy of Liberation*
Freire would ask questions that awaken awareness, dialogue, and
co-creation.
He would resist one-way communication and instead invite reflection
that dismantles hierarchy.
Questions Freire might ask:
/What truths have we been taught to accept without question—and
what happens if we reimagine them together?/
/Who is absent from this conversation, and how might their
presence transform our understanding?/
/In what ways are we both oppressed and oppressor in the systems
we inhabit?/
/How can learning become an act of love and liberation rather
than control and compliance?/
/If dialogue itself is a form of action, how might we speak today
so that freedom grows from our words?/
*🦋 If Buckminster Fuller Were Hosting: The Architect of a
Better Future*
Fuller would push the group to see humanity as a design
challenge—not a problem to fix but a system to evolve.
His questions would stretch imagination toward synergy,
sustainability, and long-range thinking.
Questions Fuller might ask:
/If our goal were to make the world work for 100% of humanity,
what assumptions would we need to discard immediately?/
/What patterns of waste—energy, time, or human potential—can we
redesign into resources?/
/How might we use the fewest resources to achieve the greatest
good for the greatest number?/
/What would our actions look like if we designed for seven
generations ahead rather than one fiscal year?/
/If the universe is inherently regenerative, what might it be
trying to teach us about balance and efficiency?/
*If Wangari Maathai Were Hosting: The Spirit of Replenishment*
Maathai would call the gathering back to the earth, community, and
moral courage.
Her questions would awaken the spiritual and ecological
consciousness within social change.
Questions Maathai might ask:
/What are we planting—literally and figuratively—that will
nourish the generations to come?/
/How can healing the land help us heal ourselves and our societies?/
/When we speak of progress, whose soil, trees, and rivers pay the
price?/
/What courage is required to nurture life in a world that rewards
destruction?/
/How can the smallest act—a seed, a gesture, a truth—become a
revolution of care?/
On Sun, Nov 2, 2025 at 9:52 AM Michael M Pannwitz via OSList
everyone@oslist.org wrote:
Dear Tony,
"If Paulo Freire, Buckminster Fuller, or Wangari Maathai were
hosting this gathering, what questions would they ask that we
might not otherwise consider?"
If they were hosting they would have their say at the beginning
of the ost event, introduce the facilitator/companion/witness and
slip into the role of participants.
In that role they would post issues, those might also be
questions, etc.
They might also not enter issues but roam as butterflies or
bumble bees or do both, etc.
Or leave the event.
Or leave and think and come back a bit later.
(I experienced one such participant at a London OSonOS, he was
terribly nervous,
left the event, stopped at the next pub, had several beers and
returned...).
Butterflies simply hang out and often are visited by other
butterflies to dream, etc.
Bumble bees are those visiting this or that breakout session and
pollinate without lingering or also stay.
Any "systemic forces" that interest them, can get on the wall.
If they believe that they will understand "systemic forces" or
even fumble with systemic
forces they might be admired or find themselves alone in their
breakout session.
The latter is also wonderful:
Nobody came and I am the only participant that can deal with this
stuff.
Unless a bumble bee visits, the participant has all the time and
can write
a beautiful or not page for the final paper.
Here are 3 utterings of the three folks you mentioned
"Nobody knows everything, but nobody knows nothing."
"Call me Trimtab"
"We all need to work hard to make a difference in our
neighborhoods, regions, and countries, and in the world as a
whole. That means making sure we work hard, collaborate, and make
ourselves better agents to change."
The author of the 3rd quote is from Kenya.
I would not be surprised if her spirit would wave through the
WOSonOS starting
in 4 days.
Greetings from a wonderful fall day in Berlin
mmp
Am 01.11.2025 um 21:19 schrieb Tony Budak:
Thanks for clarifying the facilitator’s role and the value of
“doing nothing” in terms of content. My concern is that not all
systemic forces show up as issues on the wall. They often shape
who speaks, whose ideas stick, and what gets treated as “real
work.” If we only respond when someone names it, we risk letting
those forces quietly steer us back to the status quo.
So here’s my provocation: *If Paulo Freire, Buckminster Fuller,
or Wangari Maathai were hosting this gathering, what questions
would they ask that we might not otherwise consider?*
On 11/1/2025 6:27 AM, Michael M Pannwitz wrote:
If "larger systemic forces" turn up during an ost event,
entered by a participant of the gathered system in the circle I
might address that person to add his issue on the wall so that
the issue has a name and a time for a breakout session.
In addition to posting issue at the times when folks gather in
a circle (normally gatherings in the morning and in the
evening) I also suggest to post issues at any time. To have
those issues to be visible I suggest to use a different marker
colour (the markers provided in the circle have one color,
usually black or blue, between circles I remove those markers
and provide red marker so that the new issue stands out).
Usually, several issues show up and are posted between
circles... when I see them I ask
the participants in the next circle to introduce it to the
whole crowd).
I myself would not process "the very dynamics we hope to
transform", it would destroy
my main task, namely to do nothing.
The participants are free and able to process stuff.
If they want to deal with the issue "dynamics we hope to
transform", they can and will will
act.
Greetings from Berlin
mmp
Am 01.11.2025 um 09:38 schrieb Tony Budak via OSList:
Hi Michael,
Thanks for your thoughtful clarification. I hear you on the OS
worker’s role and the commitments of the process. My concern
isn’t with the intentions of facilitators, or participants,
but with how larger systemic forces—biases, economic
pressures—can still shape what feels possible in the room.
Even in open formats, those forces don’t disappear. I’m
curious to know if and how you, or other practitioners, have
noticed or addressed this tension in practice.
My question is about how we notice and respond when the
process itself—despite its openness—begins to mirror the very
dynamics we hope to transform. How do we stay awake to that?
How do we design for more profound disruption, not just
participation?
I’m grateful for the chance to explore this with you all.
On 11/1/2025 3:42 AM, Michael M Pannwitz via OSList wrote:
Dear Tony,
the usual intention of an os worker is to expand time and
space for the unfolding
of the force of selforganisation.
The os worker does not have intentions on the content of the
os process.
The participants work actionoriented.
The only promises of the ost process are that
--- Every issue of concern to anybody will have been raised,
if they took
responsibility for doing that
--- All issues will have received full discussion, to the
extent desired
--- A full report of issues and discussions will be in the
hands of all
participants
--- Priorities will be set and action plans will be made.
The last has been changed since setting priorities is a
statistical game, the real
game is taking responsibility for the stuff that participants
live for. So folks gather
to work on their projects.
Have a great day
mmp
Am 31.10.2025 um 21:28 schrieb Tony Budak via OSList:
I won’t be able to attend the OST conference in Kenya, but
I’m following along with interest. What I keep wondering is
this: even with the best intentions, does Open Space
sometimes end up reflecting the same biases and
profit‑driven values of the larger system—pulling us back to
the status quo instead of opening the way to real change?
I’d love to hear how others have worked with this tension.
OSList mailing list --everyone@oslist.org
To unsubscribe send an email toeveryone-leave@oslist.org
See the archives here:https://oslist.org/empathy/list/everyone.oslist.org
Michael M Pannwitz
Draisweg 1, 12209 Berlin, Germany
+49 30 7728000mmpannwitz@posteo.de
WOSonOS will be in Kenya in November 6th-8th, 2025, have a look
https://www.wosonos2025.org/
OSList mailing list -- everyone@oslist.org
To unsubscribe send an email to everyone-leave@oslist.org
See the archives here:
https://oslist.org/empathy/list/everyone.oslist.org
OSList mailing list --everyone@oslist.org
To unsubscribe send an email toeveryone-leave@oslist.org
See the archives here:https://oslist.org/empathy/list/everyone.oslist.org
Dear Tony,
Open Space Technology has never promised transformation.
What we promise are very simple things that rarely appear in gatherings.
Those simple things that we can promise expand time and space for the
unfolding of the force of selforganisation, a bit at a time, at least.
We control nothing.
Control is the number one enemy.
The invitation to a gathering in the ost format is produced in the
Planning Group
organized by the host of the event.
There are effective approaches for Planning Groups to reach grand
invitations.
Have a great day
mmp
Am 03.11.2025 um 17:06 schrieb Tony Budak via OSList:
>
> *Beyond Business as Usual: Kenya WOSonOS 2025
> A Wake-Up Call for OST Practitioners - Learning to Change, Together*
>
> Friends,
>
> Open Space Technology (OST) has always promised transformation. But
> let’s be honest: too often, it’s used to manage change—not to /make/
> it. We gather, we post issues, we talk—and then we return to the same
> systems that created the problems we came to solve.
>
> If we’re serious about shifting paradigms, we need to confront the
> deeper forces that shape our gatherings before the first circle even
> begins. That starts with how we write our invitations.
>
> *Seven Challenges to the Status Quo*
>
> Here are seven provocations—four from *Dorian Cave
> <https://madocollective.org/connecting/who.html>*, three from
> visionary changemakers—that I believe every OST invitation should
> wrestle with:
>
> *Dorian Cave’s Four Denials of Modernity-Coloniality:*
>
> 1. *Denial of systemic, historical, and ongoing violence*
> → Are we willing to name the harm that shaped our institutions—and
> our own complicity in it?
> 2. *Denial of planetary limits*
> → Are we pretending we can innovate our way out of ecological
> collapse without changing how we live?
> 3. *Denial of entanglement*
> → Are we still acting as if we’re separate individuals, rather
> than deeply interdependent?
> 4. *Denial of the magnitude and complexity of the crisis*
> → Are we shrinking the problem to fit our comfort zone, instead of
> expanding our courage?
>
> *Three Provocateurs to Shake the Frame:*
>
> * *Paulo Freire* would ask: /Whose voices are missing, and how are
> we reproducing hierarchy even in “open” spaces?/
> * *Buckminster Fuller* would ask: /Are we redesigning the system, or
> just rearranging the furniture?/
> * *Wangari Maathai* would ask: /Where is the Earth in this
> conversation? What are we doing to protect life itself?/
>
> *A New Kind of Invitation*
>
> If we want OST to be more than a clever format—if we want it to be a
> vessel for paradigm shift—then our invitations must do more than ask,
> “What do you care about?” They must ask:
>
> * What truths have we been trained not to see?
> * What questions are too dangerous to name?
> * What futures are possible if we compost the cultural “stuff” that
> keeps us stuck?
>
> Let’s stop pretending that neutrality is safe. Let’s write invitations
> that disturb the comfortable and comfort the disturbed.
>
> *OST practitioners, this is your moment.*
> You don’t need to copy this word for word—but I invite you to adapt it
> boldly, responsibly, and in your own voice. Let it reflect the real
> tensions we’re living through. Let it compost the cultural “stuff”
> that keeps us stuck. Let it call forth the kind of gathering that
> Dorian Cavé,Paulo Freire, Buckminster Fuller, or Wangari Maathai would
> be proud to host.
>
> In solidarity—for more fun, joy, love, and less stuff,
> *Tony*
>
>
> On 11/2/2025 10:06 AM, Rain Warren via OSList wrote:
>> Michael,
>> I LOVE THAT QUESTION! I would even love to attend an Open Space with
>> those three in attendance. These questions really made my morning!
>> *I asked Ai your question and here are the results:*
>>
>> That’s a /brilliant/ question — and exactly the kind of reflective
>> inquiry those three visionaries would love. Each of them approached
>> transformation—of people, systems, and the planet—from profoundly
>> different but complementary angles: Freire through *critical
>> consciousness*, Fuller through *design and systems thinking*, and
>> Maathai through *ecological stewardship and community empowerment*.
>>
>> Here’s how each might frame /unexpected, deeper questions/ for a
>> gathering—questions that reach beyond the obvious and challenge
>> participants to think in revolutionary ways.
>>
>>
>> 🐝 *If Paulo Freire Were Hosting: The Pedagogy of Liberation*
>>
>> Freire would ask questions that awaken *awareness, dialogue, and
>> co-creation*.
>> He would resist one-way communication and instead invite reflection
>> that dismantles hierarchy.
>>
>> *Questions Freire might ask:*
>>
>> 1.
>>
>> /What truths have we been taught to accept without question—and
>> what happens if we reimagine them together?/
>>
>> 2.
>>
>> /Who is absent from this conversation, and how might their
>> presence transform our understanding?/
>>
>> 3.
>>
>> /In what ways are we both oppressed and oppressor in the systems
>> we inhabit?/
>>
>> 4.
>>
>> /How can learning become an act of love and liberation rather
>> than control and compliance?/
>>
>> 5.
>>
>> /If dialogue itself is a form of action, how might we speak today
>> so that freedom grows from our words?/
>>
>>
>> *🦋 If Buckminster Fuller Were Hosting: The Architect of a
>> Better Future*
>>
>> Fuller would push the group to see *humanity as a design
>> challenge*—not a problem to fix but a system to evolve.
>> His questions would stretch imagination toward *synergy,
>> sustainability, and long-range thinking*.
>>
>> *Questions Fuller might ask:*
>>
>> 1.
>>
>> /If our goal were to make the world work for 100% of humanity,
>> what assumptions would we need to discard immediately?/
>>
>> 2.
>>
>> /What patterns of waste—energy, time, or human potential—can we
>> redesign into resources?/
>>
>> 3.
>>
>> /How might we use the fewest resources to achieve the greatest
>> good for the greatest number?/
>>
>> 4.
>>
>> /What would our actions look like if we designed for seven
>> generations ahead rather than one fiscal year?/
>>
>> 5.
>>
>> /If the universe is inherently regenerative, what might it be
>> trying to teach us about balance and efficiency?/
>>
>>
>> *If Wangari Maathai Were Hosting: The Spirit of Replenishment*
>>
>> Maathai would call the gathering back to *the earth, community, and
>> moral courage*.
>> Her questions would awaken the *spiritual and ecological
>> consciousness* within social change.
>>
>> *Questions Maathai might ask:*
>>
>> 1.
>>
>> /What are we planting—literally and figuratively—that will
>> nourish the generations to come?/
>>
>> 2.
>>
>> /How can healing the land help us heal ourselves and our societies?/
>>
>> 3.
>>
>> /When we speak of progress, whose soil, trees, and rivers pay the
>> price?/
>>
>> 4.
>>
>> /What courage is required to nurture life in a world that rewards
>> destruction?/
>>
>> 5.
>>
>> /How can the smallest act—a seed, a gesture, a truth—become a
>> revolution of care?/
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Nov 2, 2025 at 9:52 AM Michael M Pannwitz via OSList
>> <everyone@oslist.org> wrote:
>>
>> Dear Tony,
>>
>> "If Paulo Freire, Buckminster Fuller, or Wangari Maathai were
>> hosting this gathering, what questions would they ask that we
>> might not otherwise consider?"
>>
>> If they were hosting they would have their say at the beginning
>> of the ost event, introduce the facilitator/companion/witness and
>> slip into the role of participants.
>>
>> In that role they would post issues, those might also be
>> questions, etc.
>> They might also not enter issues but roam as butterflies or
>> bumble bees or do both, etc.
>> Or leave the event.
>> Or leave and think and come back a bit later.
>> (I experienced one such participant at a London OSonOS, he was
>> terribly nervous,
>> left the event, stopped at the next pub, had several beers and
>> returned...).
>>
>> Butterflies simply hang out and often are visited by other
>> butterflies to dream, etc.
>>
>> Bumble bees are those visiting this or that breakout session and
>> pollinate without lingering or also stay.
>>
>> Any "systemic forces" that interest them, can get on the wall.
>> If they believe that they will understand "systemic forces" or
>> even fumble with systemic
>> forces they might be admired or find themselves alone in their
>> breakout session.
>> The latter is also wonderful:
>> Nobody came and I am the only participant that can deal with this
>> stuff.
>> Unless a bumble bee visits, the participant has all the time and
>> can write
>> a beautiful or not page for the final paper.
>>
>> Here are 3 utterings of the three folks you mentioned
>> "Nobody knows everything, but nobody knows nothing."
>> "Call me Trimtab"
>> "We all need to work hard to make a difference in our
>> neighborhoods, regions, and countries, and in the world as a
>> whole. That means making sure we work hard, collaborate, and make
>> ourselves better agents to change."
>>
>> The author of the 3rd quote is from Kenya.
>> I would not be surprised if her spirit would wave through the
>> WOSonOS starting
>> in 4 days.
>>
>> Greetings from a wonderful fall day in Berlin
>> mmp
>>
>> Am 01.11.2025 um 21:19 schrieb Tony Budak:
>>>
>>> Thanks for clarifying the facilitator’s role and the value of
>>> “doing nothing” in terms of content. My concern is that not all
>>> systemic forces show up as issues on the wall. They often shape
>>> who speaks, whose ideas stick, and what gets treated as “real
>>> work.” If we only respond when someone names it, we risk letting
>>> those forces quietly steer us back to the status quo.
>>>
>>> So here’s my provocation: *If Paulo Freire, Buckminster Fuller,
>>> or Wangari Maathai were hosting this gathering, what questions
>>> would they ask that we might not otherwise consider?*
>>>
>>>
>>> On 11/1/2025 6:27 AM, Michael M Pannwitz wrote:
>>>> If "larger systemic forces" turn up during an ost event,
>>>> entered by a participant of the gathered system in the circle I
>>>> might address that person to add his issue on the wall so that
>>>> the issue has a name and a time for a breakout session.
>>>> In addition to posting issue at the times when folks gather in
>>>> a circle (normally gatherings in the morning and in the
>>>> evening) I also suggest to post issues at any time. To have
>>>> those issues to be visible I suggest to use a different marker
>>>> colour (the markers provided in the circle have one color,
>>>> usually black or blue, between circles I remove those markers
>>>> and provide red marker so that the new issue stands out).
>>>> Usually, several issues show up and are posted between
>>>> circles... when I see them I ask
>>>> the participants in the next circle to introduce it to the
>>>> whole crowd).
>>>>
>>>> I myself would not process "the very dynamics we hope to
>>>> transform", it would destroy
>>>> my main task, namely to do nothing.
>>>> The participants are free and able to process stuff.
>>>> If they want to deal with the issue "dynamics we hope to
>>>> transform", they can and will will
>>>> act.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Greetings from Berlin
>>>> mmp
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Am 01.11.2025 um 09:38 schrieb Tony Budak via OSList:
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi Michael,
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks for your thoughtful clarification. I hear you on the OS
>>>>> worker’s role and the commitments of the process. My concern
>>>>> isn’t with the intentions of facilitators, or participants,
>>>>> but with how larger systemic forces—biases, economic
>>>>> pressures—can still shape what feels possible in the room.
>>>>> Even in open formats, those forces don’t disappear. I’m
>>>>> curious to know if and how you, or other practitioners, have
>>>>> noticed or addressed this tension in practice.
>>>>>
>>>>> My question is about how we notice and respond when the
>>>>> process itself—despite its openness—begins to mirror the very
>>>>> dynamics we hope to transform. How do we stay awake to that?
>>>>> How do we design for more profound disruption, not just
>>>>> participation?
>>>>>
>>>>> I’m grateful for the chance to explore this with you all.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 11/1/2025 3:42 AM, Michael M Pannwitz via OSList wrote:
>>>>>> Dear Tony,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> the usual intention of an os worker is to expand time and
>>>>>> space for the unfolding
>>>>>> of the force of selforganisation.
>>>>>> The os worker does not have intentions on the content of the
>>>>>> os process.
>>>>>> The participants work actionoriented.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The only promises of the ost process are that
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --- Every issue of concern to anybody will have been raised,
>>>>>> if they took
>>>>>> responsibility for doing that
>>>>>> --- All issues will have received full discussion, to the
>>>>>> extent desired
>>>>>> --- A full report of issues and discussions will be in the
>>>>>> hands of all
>>>>>> participants
>>>>>> --- Priorities will be set and action plans will be made.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The last has been changed since setting priorities is a
>>>>>> statistical game, the real
>>>>>> game is taking responsibility for the stuff that participants
>>>>>> live for. So folks gather
>>>>>> to work on their projects.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Have a great day
>>>>>> mmp
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Am 31.10.2025 um 21:28 schrieb Tony Budak via OSList:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I won’t be able to attend the OST conference in Kenya, but
>>>>>>> I’m following along with interest. What I keep wondering is
>>>>>>> this: even with the best intentions, does Open Space
>>>>>>> sometimes end up reflecting the same biases and
>>>>>>> profit‑driven values of the larger system—pulling us back to
>>>>>>> the status quo instead of opening the way to real change?
>>>>>>> I’d love to hear how others have worked with this tension.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> OSList mailing list --everyone@oslist.org
>>>>>>> To unsubscribe send an email toeveryone-leave@oslist.org
>>>>>>> See the archives here:https://oslist.org/empathy/list/everyone.oslist.org
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>
>> Michael M Pannwitz
>> Draisweg 1, 12209 Berlin, Germany
>> +49 30 7728000mmpannwitz@posteo.de
>>
>> WOSonOS will be in Kenya in November 6th-8th, 2025, have a look
>> https://www.wosonos2025.org/
>>
>> OSList mailing list -- everyone@oslist.org
>> To unsubscribe send an email to everyone-leave@oslist.org
>> See the archives here:
>> https://oslist.org/empathy/list/everyone.oslist.org
>>
>>
>> OSList mailing list --everyone@oslist.org
>> To unsubscribe send an email toeveryone-leave@oslist.org
>> See the archives here:https://oslist.org/empathy/list/everyone.oslist.org
>
> OSList mailing list --everyone@oslist.org
> To unsubscribe send an email toeveryone-leave@oslist.org
> See the archives here:https://oslist.org/empathy/list/everyone.oslist.org
Michael M Pannwitz
Draisweg 1, 12209 Berlin
+49 30 7728000mmpannwitz@posteo.de
In der Open Space World Map tummeln sich
160 Menschen aus Deutschland, Österreich und
der Schweiz.
Weltweit sind wir 543 aus 82 Ländern, die in
146 Ländern aktiv sind.
Mal reinschauen:http://www.openspaceworldmap.org/
Bei Westkreuz gibts Bücher/e-Bücher und Kärtchensätze
auf Deutsch, Englisch und auch mehrsprachig zu und um
open space herum:
https://www.westkreuz-verlag.de/produkt-kategorie/arbeit-mit-gruppen-und-organisationen/
Der WOSonOS findet dieses Jahr zum ersten Mal in Afrika statt, Kenya
https://www.wosonos2025.org/
