[ how bad it is can wait for after, the file taking his focus for now. the discussion he'd had with Markus shortly after speaking with Hafid had given Stephen time to think about the whole thing in more detail... but this, honestly, isn't a world away from that revised thought.
given a tweak or two, it's everything he and Markus discussed a need for. the coverage of the committees is wide and places no precedence, at least on "paper", on any one of the groups. all matters of life here equally important. ]
This is good. Discussion amongst specialized committees to bypass public debate, an opportunity for everyone to be heard included in the process, single voices left to tighten up the specifics.
[ a question, though - ] With that all in place, what's the need for the ambassadors?
Sure. But once we've gone through a process that allows those with the most expertise in an area, and the group as a whole, to come to a collective conclusion about the best solution to a problem - why then hand the friendliest face the option to send it back to the drawing board?
[ he understands. Hafid's got Markus at the helm in his head and while that's sensible on the one hand, a good choice, he's designed a system that really doesn't call for a leader. and one that is, in Stephen's opinio (and Markus', he knows), better for them. ]
We can have a spokesperson and someone in control of keeping the system oiled without handing them the reins to the whole operation.
[ It's indoctrination into dictatorship at its finest. The need to have someone at the top, telling everyone else what to do, to ensure the system is running smoothly. Because how else do things run without a leader?
Badly. Terribly. People are dead and everything you work for is in ruins, and you're in jail for making the world a better place.
Stephen makes a good point. But it clearly gives him pause. Sets the logical part of his mind in a heated argument with the more dominant emotional side. His brow furrows. ]
I do. [ and it's clear that it's one which has set some cogs whirring. Stephen allows him a few seconds for those turning gears to catch hold before pressing. ] What are you thinking?
[ That it doesn't actually make sense to defer to someone because they're the one in charge, especially when you know better. And things like this were the reason they'd dismantled governments and rebuilt them to function better. ]
Keeping the ambassadors, remove veto power. [ Not a total lie. ] They should still present the idea.
[ the idea of the displaced, the ideas discussed and settled on, or this idea? because if it's either of the former, fine, we can discuss that going forward. if it's the latter... ]
There are areas to improve on but that can be done after it's been presented and additional feedback has been given. This probably won't go smoothly, and a lot of the trust in it will be banked on the faith they have in the people stepping forward and supporting it.
[ He asked for this, he asked for it and he still hates every single second. ]
We need it because as we currently are, we're barely surviving on our own. We aren't surviving on our own, actually. If Morningstar cuts us lose we're screwed. This is a plan to make us self-sustaining and ensure that we're thriving as best we can, given circumstances.
[ as Hafid talks, Stephen translates it into something that's both true and positive. the result is entered into a shared document, open for Hafid to view and edit. ]
This is a plan to make us self-sustaining and ensure that we're thriving as best we can, given circumstances.
As things stand we're reliant on Morningstar to survive in the world. This worked while things were new, while there was still a chance we were just passing through, but some of our number have been here for months and as we grow it's important we find a way to handle ourselves, both for our own sake and the sake of the agency we've been depending on.
If you're comfortable with this part, I was planning on just being with you on the day to help live. I can coach a little now, but beyond that experience and a guiding hand is the best medicine.
Edited (that is not the icon I was looking for) 2019-03-12 12:56 (UTC)
I don't need a ghost writer. I can come up with the speeches and present what I have to anyone. I've sat warring countries down and forced them to sign peace treaties. I've brought tyrants to their knees and forced them to submit to a better world. [ under penalty of just, y'know, killing their self-serving leaders. ]
But I can't deal with morons who fight against what's good for them.
I know you're more than capable. But the key word being "forced" in both of those contexts is what's going to have this fall on its face if you're not careful with the way you spin it.
It's the same principle when dealing with the "morons". You need to take what you want to say and put it forward in a way that makes it taste better to whoever you're speaking. Deliver the same plate back again with a different flavour applied - shows you've been listening, doesn't ultimately impact on your proposal.
[ not that Hafid's not already aware, but Stephen Strange is no people-pleasing saint. it's just easier to get your way if everyone else thinks they're getting theirs too. ]
You have two choices. You can argue with people and watch this slip by, or you can listen to them, adjust, and build a system that works. The second you view your own opinion as absolute, the debate is over. If you show people their views are equally relevant to the point being made, and how, they'll listen to you.
Good. And no. You listen, you understand, and you reassure.
[ there's a disconnect here. he's not talking about steamrolling anyone - though admittedly, his explanation had been offhand enough that it could be implied. ]
"Valid" feedback depends on your assessment of validity, which stems from your perspective. Everyone offering feedback is going to view their feedback as valid, regardless of whether or not you agree with them. You have to actually listen.
no subject
given a tweak or two, it's everything he and Markus discussed a need for. the coverage of the committees is wide and places no precedence, at least on "paper", on any one of the groups. all matters of life here equally important. ]
This is good. Discussion amongst specialized committees to bypass public debate, an opportunity for everyone to be heard included in the process, single voices left to tighten up the specifics.
[ a question, though - ] With that all in place, what's the need for the ambassadors?
no subject
[ The world worked better when it was just "the world" in his opinion. But his opinion shouldn't be counted. ]
And we'll be exposed sooner or later. These things tend to do better with a friendly face at the helm.
no subject
[ he understands. Hafid's got Markus at the helm in his head and while that's sensible on the one hand, a good choice, he's designed a system that really doesn't call for a leader. and one that is, in Stephen's opinio (and Markus', he knows), better for them. ]
We can have a spokesperson and someone in control of keeping the system oiled without handing them the reins to the whole operation.
no subject
Badly. Terribly. People are dead and everything you work for is in ruins, and you're in jail for making the world a better place.
Stephen makes a good point. But it clearly gives him pause. Sets the logical part of his mind in a heated argument with the more dominant emotional side. His brow furrows. ]
... You raise a point.
no subject
no subject
Keeping the ambassadors, remove veto power. [ Not a total lie. ] They should still present the idea.
no subject
Present what idea?
[ the idea of the displaced, the ideas discussed and settled on, or this idea? because if it's either of the former, fine, we can discuss that going forward. if it's the latter... ]
no subject
[ He knows he's not weaseling out of doing a show and tell in front of the class. He's been trying. ]
no subject
[ an obvious release of tension as gearing up for a battle on the merits of telling this himself no longer proves necessary. ]
In that case, I think you've got a sound working draft here.
no subject
There are areas to improve on but that can be done after it's been presented and additional feedback has been given. This probably won't go smoothly, and a lot of the trust in it will be banked on the faith they have in the people stepping forward and supporting it.
[ and again why him ]
no subject
[ agreement and no comment on the unspoken. he hears it loud and clear, and he's not giving it the time of day. ]
So. Have you got a battle plan in mind?
no subject
[ Sullen. ]
no subject
Describe to me what this is and why we need it.
no subject
We need it because as we currently are, we're barely surviving on our own. We aren't surviving on our own, actually. If Morningstar cuts us lose we're screwed. This is a plan to make us self-sustaining and ensure that we're thriving as best we can, given circumstances.
no subject
This is a plan to make us self-sustaining and ensure that we're thriving as best we can, given circumstances.
As things stand we're reliant on Morningstar to survive in the world. This worked while things were new, while there was still a chance we were just passing through, but some of our number have been here for months and as we grow it's important we find a way to handle ourselves, both for our own sake and the sake of the agency we've been depending on.
Carry on.
no subject
And how exactly is this approach going to work when I have to answer questions?
no subject
If you're comfortable with this part, I was planning on just being with you on the day to help live. I can coach a little now, but beyond that experience and a guiding hand is the best medicine.
no subject
But I can't deal with morons who fight against what's good for them.
no subject
It's the same principle when dealing with the "morons". You need to take what you want to say and put it forward in a way that makes it taste better to whoever you're speaking. Deliver the same plate back again with a different flavour applied - shows you've been listening, doesn't ultimately impact on your proposal.
[ not that Hafid's not already aware, but Stephen Strange is no people-pleasing saint. it's just easier to get your way if everyone else thinks they're getting theirs too. ]
no subject
Sounds like something my old man would say.
no subject
You have two choices. You can argue with people and watch this slip by, or you can listen to them, adjust, and build a system that works. The second you view your own opinion as absolute, the debate is over. If you show people their views are equally relevant to the point being made, and how, they'll listen to you.
no subject
[ you can tell how thrilled he is about the idea. ]
I have no problem with valid feedback.
no subject
[ there's a disconnect here. he's not talking about steamrolling anyone - though admittedly, his explanation had been offhand enough that it could be implied. ]
"Valid" feedback depends on your assessment of validity, which stems from your perspective. Everyone offering feedback is going to view their feedback as valid, regardless of whether or not you agree with them. You have to actually listen.
no subject
I do listen.
no subject
That needs to be made obvious in your responses.
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)