Meet the Maker Recordings and Transcripts

Press the play button below to listen to an audio recording in English or read the translatable transcript below.

Cyndy: Hi everyone. My name is Cyndy and I am the Bylaw Trustee Co-chair. I’m here to open today’s Meet the Maker session. I’d like to share some important information so you can fully participate when we move into the breakout sessions.

Today’s sessions are being recorded and the audio will be posted on oa.org for members who are unable to attend today. If you ask a question, please identify yourself by your first name and your service body name. You may use an alias if you wish to remain anonymous. Our moderators today are BJ, who will be working in room one and Preston, who will be working in room two.

And the technical support and timers are Sharlotte for room one and myself for room two. In each session, the Maker of the motion will present their proposal followed by time for questions. This is not time for debate or amendments to these proposals.

Today’s purpose is to understand what the Maker hopes to achieve with their proposal. Suggestions for wording or changes should be addressed either at Conference or included in your service body’s Agenda Questionnaire responses.

Your role today is to listen, ask clarifying questions and take what you learned back to your service body, so they can make an informed decision as to which proposals need to be heard at the Conference.

Now we’re ready for you to move into the breakout rooms. Sandy’s going to post that on the screen and select your breakout room as. Quick as you can, and we’ll see you on the other side.

Press the play button below to listen to an audio recording in English or read the translatable transcript below.

BJ: Hello, my name is BJ and I’m your moderator for this session. In this session, we’ll be discussing the proposed policy motions A, B, M, C, D, and E from this year’s Agenda Questionnaire. Sharlotte will be screen sharing the motions and serving as our timer to help us stay on track. We have six motions to discuss and each motion will last six minutes. I will call each maker to present their motion. They may read or summarize the motion and briefly explain why they submitted it for consideration.

If you have a question, please wait until the maker has finished speaking before raising your electronic hand. Once we move to the question and answer period, raise your hand as soon as you have a question. I will call on participants in the order they appear on my screen. When called on, please unmute, ask your question and then mute when you’re finished.

Each member may ask one question plus one brief clarifying follow-up question if needed. If you have an additional question, you may raise your hand again and you will be called on after others have had an opportunity to speak. When we reach the six minute limit, we’ll move on to the next motion. If time allows, after all motions have been presented, we will open the floor for additional questions. Please be clear about which motion you’re speaking about. We must conclude this session 10 minutes before the hour to allow time for transitions. Let’s begin with the first motion. Timer, please set the time for six minutes.

Sharlotte, please present motion A.

Proposed New Business Motion A

Sharlotte: Thank you very much, BJ. Sharlotte G., On behalf of OA Sunlight Intergroup. This motion is quite a simple motion. In previous years, the Bylaws Committee and the Board of Trustees have removed all gendered language from the bylaws and policy manual. However, this one change was left over and it’s simply removing in the word chairmanship and replacing it with position of chair, just so that it is fully inclusive of all of the diversity of our fellowship.

Thank you.

BJ: Thank you, Sharlotte. Are there any questions? Cindy, please go ahead.

Cindy: Hi. I was wondering, it didn’t show the history of other changes of chairman to chair. I thought, I noticed at one point there was a couple of words, chairmans in that policy, and I was wondering when they changed.

Sharlotte: So I believe the history is being marked as nothing. However, I do agree with the maker of the motion and obviously the history is provided by the World Service Office, and so the question would need to go to the World Service Office.

However, to the furthest of my knowledge, there was not any other instances of this otherwise, the then bylaws committee would’ve called this and updated it. But I am aware that the Board of Trustees have an internal motion that says that, they will deliberately try to be gender inclusive.

 so there may have been some editorial changes in the past, but I do not have any further information on that.

Cindy: Thank you so much.

BJ: Thank you. Bill, go ahead with your question.

Bill: I was just wondering, it says the vice chair will then assume, why doesn’t it just say assume a chair or assume position of chair. Okay so it’s just gonna be, it’ll be the chair or the Chairperson or chair. What is the, we just used the word chair. Which I know is acceptable but then again, gets into the vice chair will assume the chair would be the, you would need to put the position of.

As you can see, Bill, the position of as being underlined, because without the admin of the words position of this wouldn’t be good English, it would say, the vice chair will assume the chair, which isn’t great English. and so the word, the additional of the words position of has been added for clarity.

Okay. So position of is not is I, when I just first read this thing, my mistake, I was thinking it was, that would be what it would be from that point on. And we would call it position of chair as opposed to just chair. But what we’re saying is it would just be the, just use the word chair. I got it. Okay. I was misunderstanding.

BJ: Okay. Thank you. Next question.

Sarit: Thank you. Sarit, I’m a compulsive overeater from Israel. I just want to be clear that, Sharlotte said that, this change was made. this is the last, place where the change must, must be taken. Not true.

Sharlotte: Thank you for the question. As far as I can tell, I’ve done a full review of the bylaws and policy manual, subpart B, not Subpart A, but Subpart B and the policy manual.

And to the furthest extent of my knowledge, this is the last occurrence that needs to be changed. Yes.

Sarit: Thank you.

BJ: Thank you. Any other questions? We might have a minute left or so. Okay, we can go on to the next motion. Thank you, Sharlotte, and if you could reset the time. So I have Sue or Gail will be presenting motion B.

Proposed New Business Motion B

Sue: Hi, my name is Sue. I’m from the Milwaukee Area Intergroup. Our change is very simple also. We just wanna add the Plain Language Big Book to approved literature. AA already has it approved and we have been reading it in one of our meetings and find it to be very helpful. I’m not saying to get rid of the old Big Book but this is in addition. It’s in very plain language, non-gendered. There’s no section To the Wives. It might say spouses, but I I’m sure it doesn’t say wives. It’s just very good.

BJ: Good. Okay. Are there any questions for Sue? Please go ahead.

Loudovika: Hello, Loudovika, Region Nine Chair. Just a question, clarification actually, because in our statement of approved literature, it says all AA conference approved books, booklets, and all future additions thereof. Because I’m not an English native English speaker. Okay. I would like here, if you can clarify why is it’s not in the list that we can read. Because I don’t understand it. Thank you.

Sue: Do you want me to answer that? The conference approved books, booklets, and all future editions thereof with additional editions and copyright of 2010. We’re asking to change that to 2026 or earlier.

Okay. Not that matter. Okay. because I don’t disagree. I will not press. I will let other people ask. Thank you.

BJ: Pat. Go ahead please.

Pat S.: Thank you, Pat S. from New Hampshire Intergroup. I have a question and a follow up question, I think. Have the members of either the literature committee or the Board of Trustees read the Plain Language Big Book?

BJ: I can answer that. We haven’t discussed it in a board meeting.

Pat S.: Okay. And my next question is, is it considered prudent to, before this is accepted, to have it go to the literature committee to be read. And the reason I ask that is because of the interpretation of updating, like this is not an update of the, and I don’t mean this as an argument as I see it, it is not an update of the original Big Book. It is an additional book that was approved by AA. And so should this go to the Conference Literature Committee before it’s presented to the fellowship?

BJ: I’ll let Sharlotte answer after I say this is not addition to the Big Book. So this is a separate book.

Pat S.: Exactly.

BJ: Yeah, it’s a separate book.

Pat S.: That’s what I’m saying.

BJ: Go ahead, Sharlotte.

I think you meant Susan.

No, Sharlotte has her hand up so I’m sure she wants to reply or say something.

Sharlotte: Actually, I had my hand up to ask my own question. If you want me to weigh in, I absolutely can. I believe the reason this has been suggested, is because it’s a new publication and if a member wishes to have the Conference Approved Literature Committee consider it, then they can make such a motion at the Conference.

BJ: Okay. I apologize to Oliver. Oliver, I thought this was still Sharlotte’s motion, so I was gonna let Sharlotte reply to her own motion. Oliver, please go ahead with your question.

Oliver: Thank you very much. Quick question. Could you please, say again? Which motion It is exactly which letter it is.

Sue: Letter B.

BJ: B as in boy.

Oliver: Okay. Thank you very much. My question was why. I guess there must be a list somewhere of I know there is a document of OA approved literature, which includes AA approved literature. Why do we need here to specify specifically one book? Not others. I’m just thinking that if what in the future, if we add more books, we will have to update against this policy.

I’m just a bit confused why for this specific book it needs to be specified here. Why for the others it doesn’t have to.

BJ: Good question, Oliver. It’s not all books are approved to read in OA meetings. So this is a new book.

Oliver: Yeah, I agree with that. And it’s, and hence my question because it’s not all books, so we already have,

BJ: Okay. I hear the confusion and so we’ll try to answer it in the end. We’re out of time.

Sue: I need to leave. Is that all right or do I need to hang around? I can leave.

BJ: Yes. Thank you, Sue. Okay. Timer, please reset the time. Loudovika, please present motion C.

Proposed New Business Motion C

Loudovika: Yes, so I’m Loudovika, Region Nine Chair. So combining conference policies, 1979 C and 1986 B into a single clear worded policy brings all financial reporting materials, the treasurers report, and the budget together in one unified document. It is a matter of clarity, which is one of our spiritual principles. Currently member must review separate reports that often overlap, creating unnecessary complexity and confusion. A single financial report improves consistency and transparency, allowing members to understand the organization’s financial position more easily and make informed decisions more efficiently. I think it’s simply I’m here.

BJ: Thank you. Any questions? Go ahead, Cindy. Thanks.

Cindy: Thank you. Did we skip proposal M or is that gonna be happening later?

BJ: No, we did. I’m so sorry. Okay. Okay, so let’s go back to motion.

Loudovika: Can I suggest something since I’m guessing that there are no question for me, maybe we just finish that and do that.

BJ: Sure. Okay. Okay, so let’s finish Loudovika’s Motion C Are there any questions for Loudovika? Okay. Thank you Loudovika Okay, Lisa, please go ahead. You have a question for Loudovika?

Lisa: I do. One quick one. Loudovika did you get any feedback from the finance folk at World Service on whether or not this new idea was feasible?

Loudovika: No.

Lisa: Okay. Thank you.

Proposed New Business Motion M

BJ: Thank you, Loudovika. Let’s move back to motion M. Timer, please reset the time. Is Sue or Gail here to present motion M? I think I misspoke when I said, Sue, when Sue asked if she could leave. Okay, let’s go on to motion…

Sharlotte: BJ, would you like to present the motion, just in case there are questions? ’cause I understand it.

BJ: Are you asking if you would like to present it?

Sharlotte: I’m just saying I think it should be presented. So would you like me to present it so that we can ask questions?

BJ: Go ahead Sharlotte. That would be good. Thanks.

Sharlotte: Thank you very much. So this motion is very similar to the motion that we considered prior to Loudovika’s, except that instead of just including Plain Language book. It also allows all literature that AA has produced between 2010 and 2026.

BJ: Any questions on the motion? Go ahead, Annie.

Annie: I am just concerned about how this, including all of AA literature, will affect the sale of OA literature because there is some similarities. Having both kinds of literature. I love the Plain Language Big Book, and I think definitely we need to include it, but I’m concerned that a lot of the other literature that comes forward will impact the sale of OAs literature and we need to sell literature.

BJ: Okay, thank you for the statement. And I just wanna remind it is not a time for debate. And it’s more questions for the maker. And this will be recorded so the maker will be able to hear your questions. Cindy, go ahead, please.

Cindy: Yes. So the same question from the prior motion.

About specifically including the name of this one book. Does that mean that every time a new book comes out, we want to also say this includes this? That’s all. Thanks.

BJ: Good question, Oliver. Your next please.

Oliver: Yes, thank you. It’s more or less the same question. Basically, if we say with original edition copyrights 2026 sets by itself, if I understand correctly, include the Plain Language Big Book.

Therefore, I don’t see the need to include this question. So is there a reason why we want to specifically include this? Thank you.

BJ: Yes, I believe Oliver because how our wording is currently that only new versions of the Big Book will be accepted. Not everything that OA produces. And so that’s why currently it does not include the Plain Language Big Book. And it will only include going forward all new additions of the Big Book. So that’s what this is trying to clarify. Sharlotte, go ahead please.

Sharlotte: Thank you Sharlotte G., Compulsive overeater from, I guess now I’m wearing my other hat from OA Rainbow because that’s who I’ll be representing at the conference.

My question is, does the maker of the Motion or the World Service Office have a list of what this list would include? The list of publications between 2010 and 2026 in all countries. Where AA literature is produced, and can that list be made available? If so, please.

BJ: It currently does not exist because it’s not allowed. So the maker would have to come up with that list. Bruce, you’re next.

Bruce: Thanks BJ. Compulsive eater from Ottawa, Ontario. My name is Bruce. I would like the maker to consider about putting the year 2026. The concern is that this would include literature copyrighted after we vote on this, we would be voting this in April, and this would include any books that are copyrighted for example, in December. And these would be literature that we don’t know yet. And because this we’re voting into the future and this might be ruled out of order. Thanks.

BJ: Good comment. Okay. Any other questions? Thank you everyone. Let’s move on to motion D and Cindy, can you present motion D please?

Proposed New Business Motion D

Cindy: Hi. Sure, thanks BJ. Hi everyone. I am Cindy C the Region Three Trustee Liaison and Conference Approved Literature Committee, Trustee Co chair. I’m presenting this motion on behalf of the Conference Approved Literature Committee. So this is a motion to change. Policy 2011 B by, if you look at the second paragraph of the motion, we would strike out the telephone tool and replace it with outreach.

This supports OAs’ primary purpose. We know that a recent survey of the fellowship Recovery, What Works for You, reported that 80% of the respondents do use one or more of our tools of recovery on a daily basis. Quick history on this. The tools of recovery pamphlet was first reviewed by the Literature Review Committee, that is a board committee made up of three board members.

They looked at the pamphlet and wondered if perhaps the specific tool telephone might be outdated and should be looked at. So it was suggested to the Conference Approved Literature Committee, that they look at this tool and consider a possible change. The Conference Approved Literature Committee subcommittee felt that the tool name telephone implies only to one form of communication.

Yet the true value of this tool in our recovery can be realized in many forms in addition to telephone calls. One to one connections are made through mail, text messages, email and social media applications, all are common practices today. It was felt that the tools of recovery should reflect actual practice by the fellowship. Thank you. Happy to answer questions.

BJ: Thank you, Cindy. Any questions? Bob, please go ahead.

Bob: Hi. Thank you BJ. I’m Bob a compulsive eater and the Region Seven Trustee Liaison. Cindy, just a simple question. Did the committee consider the term outreach is often used as for committees as well? Public information, professional outreach or outreach committees, was that discussed at all as a concern with confusion, I guess between now changing it to a tool?

 Just wanted to ask if that was discussed.

Cindy: Thanks for the question, Bob. I may ask Barbara V. to answer this question as the subcommittee chair. Go ahead Barbara. I think you have your hand raised.

Barbara: Thank you. I’m Barbara V., compulsive overeater, food addict. We did not consider, in the full conference literature committee meeting, nor in our subcommittee meetings that there were outreach committees. It personally, I am not aware of Outreach Committees in my Region and in my years as a Region and World Service Delegate.

BJ: Thank you. We’ll go on to Sharlotte’s question.

Sharlotte: Thank you Sharlotte G., from OA Rainbow. My question is, sorry if this strays into debate, but I have an issue with removing the word telephone. Was the thought of, not striking the word telephone, but either putting telephone and outreach or adding a new tool as outreach considered as an option in the preparation of this motion?

Cindy: Thanks, Sharlotte, for the question. Barbara, you could correct me if I’m wrong, but I’m going to say that the subcommittee did not give that consideration.

BJ: Okay. We’ll go on to Alan for our next question.

Alan B.: Hi, Alan. B from Westlake, Ohio. Delegate. So within this motion, I’m trying to think. I just went through the others and I apologize. I’m in my car. That would change also the tools pamphlet, right? If this passed and the verbiage, is there any verbiage that’s been written up? Yeah. Is there any verbiage that’s been written up for the tool, the new tool?

Cindy: I’ll start. And Barbara, you chime in if you want. So just a reminder that this change does go beyond the pamphlet. This is a policy change. So if this were to pass, we would also make this change in due time to all wherever the tools for recovery are mentioned. And I know that, yes, the committee I’m guessing is changing the text under the tool, perhaps all the tools because they’re looking at just updating and changing any text as necessary in the pamphlet.

But they have to wait to see what happens, obviously with this, change to to go further with their work. Great. Thank you very much. Appreciate it.

BJ: Thank you, Cindy. Timer, please reset the time we have to move on. Lisa, please present motion E.

Proposed New Business Motion E

Lisa: Hello everyone. Okay this motion is to amend the preamble. The first sentence of the preamble currently says Overeaters Anonymous is a fellowship of individuals who through should experience strength and hope are recovering from compulsive overeating. The Anorexic and Bulimic Specific Focus Service Board would like it to say Overeaters Anonymous is a fellowship in of individuals who, through shared experience, strength and hope are recovering from compulsive eating.

 The purpose is to welcome people with all of the different compulsive eating disorders that exist. Both in OA and outside of OA in order to welcome them in. I’m ready for questions.

BJ: Are there any questions? Marlene, please go ahead.

Marlene: Hi. Thanks. Marlene, compulsive overeater. I guess the question I wanna ask, is there gonna do this change, is there gonna be anywhere in our literature that does mention overeating? As an overeater, first and always, and never having any anorexic thoughts? I just wanna know, will I be able to feel that this is the my place?

That’s my question. Is there gonna be any place in our literature that says overeating? Thank you.

Lisa: Thank you, Marlene. I’m so glad you asked that question. First of all the purpose of this is only to change this one word. We have no interest in changing every mention of overeating in the literature to compulsive eating.

Because overeating is a description of a type of compulsive eating, and it’s really important that we keep that. I don’t consider that to be anything anyone needs to worry about in this motion or any of our other motions.

Thank you so much for the question.

BJ: Sari, please go ahead.

Sarit: Hi, Sarit a compulsive overeater from Israel. If this word will be changed, how will it affect our name Overeaters Anonymous, OA.

Lisa: I’m so glad that you asked that question. Again, there’s nothing in this motion that addresses changing the name of Overeaters Anonymous, but I will give you the example that Narcotics Anonymous, which existed since 1953. The word narcotics is nowhere in their Steps. I think it is. We wouldn’t be the only Twelve Step program to have our name, the Steps not have exactly what is in our name. Thank you.

BJ: Margie. Please go ahead.

Margie: Hi, I’m Margie. I’m a compulsive eater from Texas Region Three, and mine is similar to others. The question is, how does this affect any of the other literature and if for instance, this gets passed or heard and then passed and then well in the next couple years, somebody wanna come up and change it in other places of the literature, that’s my concern.

Lisa: Thank you for your question. I would say first of all, that is not at all what we are interested in doing. Just if I’m talking about what our surface board is interested in. And of course this motion doesn’t do that. What it does do is open up an open invitation for people to talk about to talk more about all the different ways of compulsive eating, and I think that’s helpful for everybody. It happens that people come into OA and become anorexic after they, before were compulsive eaters. No, we have no interest that’s not what we’re trying to do here.

We’re just trying to make the first sentence definition of what OA is include everybody who is in OA. Thank you.

BJ: Thank you, Sharlotte. Please go ahead.

Sharlotte: Sharlotte G., OA Rainbow. Lisa, the OA World Service Business Conference policy manual policy 1991c for Charlie says the terms compulsive eater, compulsive overeater and compulsive eaten and compulsive overeaten be used interchangeably in OA literature. Obviously, The Preamble is OA literature, was this thought of firstly, and also, is there any thought of changing in this policy, so that it forces OA literature to use in term that you’re suggesting in this motion.

Lisa: Thank you Sharlotte. This question has been brought to us and we discussed it, although it was after we wrote our motions. And here is our thoughts on this. The fact that there’s a policy from 20 years ago that says that compulsive eating and compulsive overeating are interchangeable.

If anything that strengthens our argument, that is perfectly fine for this change to happen. What we’re trying to do is have the newcomer is not gonna know about that policy. They’re gonna read The Preamble and wonder, am I a full member of this place? Or am I just welcome, but I’m not really I’m a little bit not exactly a part of.

BJ: Thank you, Lisa. Okay, so we have gone through all the motions. We have about a minute left. If anybody has a question on a previous motion that we’ve talked about, go ahead. Kathy, please.

Follow-up Discussion

Kathy G.: Hi Kathy. G., Hardcore, bulimic, food addict from Minneapolis, Minnesota. Unity Intergroup. This is just actually, stop me if this is out of order, not a question, but in response to a question. I’m on the World Service approved literature committee. And when we discussed the tool changing the tool of telephone not everyone was in agreement about the term outreach. And in fact, when we voted on four different terms. No one of them had more than two extra votes.

It was almost parody. So it’s not like overwhelmingly in favor of outreach, it just happened to get a few more votes than the others. Connection was another possibility. Personal connection, personal outreach. And we did discuss, because I’m also on the PIPO committee, which is Public Information Professional Outreach that could it be confusing?

The answer is I believe it could be confusing. Thank you. I’ll pass.

BJ: Thank you and I have that at 12 minutes to the hour. So we’re at time.

Press the play button below to listen to an audio recording in English or read the translatable transcript below.

Preston: Hello, my name is Preston, and I’ll be the moderator for this session. In this session, we will be discussing the proposed policy motions, F, G, H, I, J, and K from this year’s Agenda Questionnaire. Cyndy will be screen sharing the motions, and serving as our timer to help us stay on track.

We have six motions to discuss and each motion will last six minutes. I will call each maker to present their motion. They may read or summarize the motion and briefly explain why they submitted it for consideration. If you have a question, please wait until the maker has finished speaking before raising your electronic hand.

Once you move to the question and answer period, raise your hand. As soon as you have a question, I will call participants in order as they appear on my screen. When called on, please unmute, ask your question then mute when you are finished. Each member may ask one question plus one brief, clarify and follow up if needed. If you have an additional question, you may raise your hand again and we will be called on after others have had an opportunity to speak. When you reach the six minute time limit, we’ll move on to the next motion. If time allows after all motions have been presented, we will open the floor for additional questions. Please be clear about which motion you’re asking about. We must conclude this session, 10 minutes before the hour to allow time for transitions. Let’s begin with our first motion. Timer, please set the time for six minutes. Cyndy, please present motion. F.

Proposed New Business Motion F

Cyndy: Okay. Motion F. I want to change Policy 2010 E because currently it says that no email contact information will be published on oa.org in the find of meeting section. And yet we are finding that our members, because they want people to know how to get in touch with them, they’re putting it in the notes section, the notes field. So I would like to change the way that mechanism works and I need your permission, or I need to change the policies so that we can enact it. The idea is that, and I have been told that I have put this in here. Backwards because GDPR requires that the contact opt in rather than opt out, which means they get to say whether or not they want to be that doesn’t actually talk.

Or maybe in the notes it talks about opt in versus opt out. But we will set it up so it’s in accordance with GDPR that they can grant permission or not grant permission based on their preference. If your email is in the file record, it will not be published unless you have granted permission.

So that’s what the change is about. Questions.

Preston: Okay. Are there any questions? We’ll start taking questions now. I’ll call on you in order that I see who has raised their hand. Raise your electronic hand please.

Okay, our first question is from Carol Ch.

Carol Ch: Hi, I am Carol compulsive overeater. Maybe you said this, I got into the room two a little bit late, but it seemed to me when reading this motion that the intent is to show inquirers. That we are just as vulnerable as they are and we want to let them know that, is that true?

Cyndy: The actual purpose is that so our members and inquirers people who want to know about your meeting have opportunities and ways to contact you. And so this is a change simply because we’ve always hidden the email addresses. We require one on file just so that the office can get in touch with the contact person but we’ve never published them officially on the website. There are people who would like to get information, but they don’t want to make that phone call or they don’t want to text, and so they have another way to reach you, but we have to get permission from the body to put that information clearly out on the website.

Carol Ch: Oh, thank you.

Preston: Thank you, Cyndy. Sandy, C.

Sandy G.: Hi. Would this become part of the new Find a Meeting website or is this something we’re gonna roll out now? Either way, is there a cost associated.

Cyndy: There won’t be any actual cost because it’ll be a part of the current upgrade process. We’re going to, in good faith, build it in and then if we can’t turn it on because the motion fails, we still have to collect the data. So it won’t be a big deal either way financially.

Sandy C.: Okay. Good. Thanks.

Preston: Thanks, Sandy. Are there any more questions?

Okay. Thank you. Cyndy. Timer, please reset the timer please. I’m sorry. Ayala has a question.

Ayala: Thanks. I didn’t understand where it will be published the email? And if we can change our solution if we want to end the publish of the email.

Cyndy: We want to change the policy that says no emails will be published on the website. So that it’s okay with the permission of the contact person to publish their email address.

So yes, we want to start putting that out on the website, if the person gives their permission. Okay. We’re trying to expand the ways people can get in touch with meeting contacts. This is just one of the ways.

Ayala: Thank you.

Preston: Thank you. Are there more questions?

Okay, there are no more questions. Cyndy, please reset the timer, and Ayla, if you can put your hand down please if you have no more questions. Thank you. Cyndy, please present motion G.

Proposed New Business Motion G

Cyndy: Motion G is about changing the method we use in order to distribute the names of delegates. Currently that’s done after the after the World Service Business Conference. At the end, it comes out after the fact, maybe a couple weeks later, but last year when we had a virtual conference, somebody said it would’ve been nice to have a way to contact people that I heard talking about something that I felt needed to be worked on or something, and yet I had no idea what their names were or more importantly, what their contact information was. So we want to change the process so that the list of delegates contact information is published ahead of time so that people can connect with one another.

Preston: Okay. Are there any questions? Sandy C.

Sandy C.: Hi. I bet you said this and I bet I wasn’t listening, but it’s an opt in, right?

Cyndy: It’s an opt in. You need to say, I’m giving you my permission.

Sandy C.: So how do we capture that opt-in for everybody who’s already registered for WSBC, or it wouldn’t roll out before?

Cyndy: It won’t roll out until next year this year it won’t be available.

Sandy C.: Okay, cool. Thanks.

Preston: Thanks Sandy.

Are there more questions?

Cyndy: I’ll say, luckily we’re in person this year.

Preston: Carol Ch.

Carol Ch: Hi, I’m Carol Compulsive Overeater again. I’m sorry to belabor this point, but I just checked the OA, find a meeting feature. And there are email addresses published. I’m confused. Why? Tell me, explain. Explain this.

Cyndy: I don’t believe their emails published. If they are, they’re in the notes section, which is something the members have done for themselves.

But we as an organization want to ensure that we have not gone back on our word to our policy. And our policy says that emails will not be. And that’s the previous motion. I’m sorry, that’s the previous motion. And so if you need to talk about that further, contact me after the meeting.

Carol Ch: Okay. Sorry. Thank you.

Preston: Okay. Thank you. Okay. Please reset the timer. Melanie, please present motion H.

Proposed New Business Motion H

Melanie: Hi, my name is Melanie and I am a member of the Conference Approved Literature Committee, and our motion is for policy 1993a and the current wording is:

“It was adopted that we, the 1993 Business Conference of Overeaters Anonymous suggest that OA meetings and events be closed with one of the following, the Serenity Prayer, the Seventh Step Prayer, the Third Step Prayer, and the OA Promise. I Put My Hand In Yours.” and we propose that we slash 1993. Slash be closed with one and replace it with use any. And so it would read, “It was adopted that we, the Business Conference of Overeaters Anonymous suggest that OA meetings and events use any of the following, the Serenity Prayer, the Seven Step Prayer, the Third Step Prayer, or the OA Promise. I Put My Hand In Yours.”

The intent is to bring the policy into alignment with current practices. We didn’t even know the Conference Literature Committee didn’t even know that the policy existed. When we’ve seen that this probably should be cleaned up because we say those prayers anytime during a meeting. So to update the business conference policy, the wording would need to be changed wherever it appears online.

The cost would be staff time. It supports the primary purpose because it updates the policy that helps promote clarity and unity within the fellowship. And when they’re void of these spiritual principles, it does not attract newcomers, especially people to do service because there’s confusion if they happen to read the policy.

And I think that’s enough of it, and people can ask questions if there’s any.

Preston: Thank you, Melanie. Are there any questions? Please raise your electronic hand. Sandy C.

Sandy C.: Sorry. Trying to give space to everybody, but I do have questions. So Melanie. There’s also a motion about adding the serenity statement. Maybe this is more for reference, I don’t know, is, are those two things conditional? Can you, can we write in a condition to this one that if that gets passed, that would be included in this list?

Melanie: When the committee brought the motions to the CLC, we had a meeting and I’m the delegate co-chair. The delegates decided to split the motion. It was as one and we decided to split it because the confusion that was amongst the delegates when we were discussing it. So to clarify it and keep it easy and simple, we divided it so that the serenity statement would be one, and this would be something else.

If that doesn’t pass, then this would, which is updating the policy.

Sandy C.: Yeah. So then if that does, if the Serenity Statement one does pass what happens?

Melanie: It’ll be sen all glued together. The serenity statement would be included in with this change if this passes as well.

Sandy C.: Okay. Good. Thanks.

Preston: Thank you Sandy. Are there more questions? Okay, if not Cyndy, please reset the timer. Claire, please present Motion I.

Proposed New Business Motion I

Claire: Claire, Compulsive overeater, member of the Conference Approved Literature Committee. Do we have that on screen?

Preston: And Claire, if you could speak up just a little bit please.

Claire: Okay. Turn up mouth volume. Thank you, Cyndy.

So this motion is in line with, as has just been pointed out with the last one. This is a little different though. The current wording for the World Service Business Conference policy 1993a: “The 1993a business conference of Overeaters Anonymous suggests that OA meetings and events can be closed with one of the following, the Serenity Prayer, the Seventh Step Prayer, and the Third Step Prayer, or the OA Promise, I Put My Hand In Yours.

Our proposal is that we change this to strike 1993, so it will say “We, the business conference of Overeaters Anonymous suggests that OA meetings and events be closed with one of the following, the Serenity Prayer, the Seventh Step Prayer, the Serenity Statement, the Third Step Prayer, or the OA Promise, I Put My Hand In Yours.” We intended to bring this to the conference this year to bring it into alignment with current practice by adding a secular option for meetings and events. So that this Serenity statement, which reads, I seek the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, the courage to change the things I can and the wisdom to know the difference.

This is already in current use in many agnostic, atheist, secular, free thinker meetings. I in fact heard it first ,of all in 2024 in a workshop at the Conference. And this also would support the Conference Approved Literature Committee project at the moment that is working on a secular daily reader. We would like to be able to publish the serenity statement within our literature. If it’s not approved, then we can’t publish it. So that would be the second intention Implementation would be to update the conference policy manual.

Wording needs to be changed wherever it is online. The cost is staff time. The primary purpose? How does this support OA’s primary purpose? OA is a spiritual program, not a religious fellowship, and this change would help us succeed in our primary purpose in supporting inclusivity, reaching more newcomers.

It’s in line with the unity with diversity policy.

Preston: Thank you, Claire. Are there any questions? Ellen R.

Ellen R.: Yes. Thank you. My name is Ellen. I’m a compulsive overeater. I choose recovery today. I’ve been in program for a long time, and until I read this stuff, I’ve never heard of this serenity statement. I’ve been trying to search for it through the entire oa.org.

Where is it? Could someone please direct me to it? Because it’s hard to and if you did say it earlier I was so busy trying to find it. So can someone direct me to it?

Claire: It isn’t actually there, Ellen. It just exists within the secular community. It’s used as an alternative to the Serenity Prayer to make it more inclusive and more accepting to those of us in program, who do not identify with a deity.

Preston: Thank you. Lucy H. Please.

Lucy H.: Thank you. Hi, I’m Lucy, compulsive eater. It similar but a continuation, I was going to ask the same thing, right? Does this, the Serenity statement, is that a thing? Is that something I can find, as a existing document essentially.

And if it’s not, then. How can we refer to it in a policy if it doesn’t exist? I don’t. I just don’t. I would imagine we have to have it as a serenity, like on the OA website, for example, or in literature. Like this is the prayer version, this is the statement version.

I’m not sure I understand the implementation, I think is my point. Because we’d be referring to something that doesn’t exist. It’s not that I think it’s a bad idea. I just think, I dunno how we can refer to a thing that isn’t standard and isn’t listed somewhere.

Claire: Melanie, can you help me out here? I’m not entirely sure how to answer this question.

Gary: I do. Thank you. It does exist. It’s on the format. You can find it on the format for the secular agnostic atheist meetings under Meeting formats, and that has been accepted and approved by the Board of Trustees. Thank you.

Lucy H.: Thank you. That fully answers the question ’cause I just thought if I need to be able to find it in a place to then know what that policy refers to. So Thank you Gary.

Claire: Thank you Gary.

Preston: Okay, any more questions? Alright, thank you Claire. Cyndy, please reset the time, please. And next we’ll call Cee to present Motion J.

Proposed New Business Motion J

Cee: All right. We are on J. correct?

Preston: Correct.

Cee: So this is a motion which, has come from one of our Intergroups. And the goal is to create an ethnically Jewish focus category. The operative word there being ethnically Jewish. Much of the contention around this motion and discussion around this motion has to do with the introduction of religion.

And I want to say again that this motion is not about a religious category. It is about an ethnic category. We already have ethnic categories in Overeaters Anonymous. We have several ethnic categories in Overeaters Anonymous, and one of the reasons we have those ethnic categories is because there are people who feel that they need places to recover that are safe.

It would be wonderful thing if all of the world was safe, if all of our fellowship was safe, but unfortunately the reality is that is not the case. We already have all of these ethnic groups participating throughout our fellowship. But these are set aside spaces where they are able to be and to do and to say what they would not necessarily feel able to do in other ways.

So we want to carry the message to all who suffer, and some of those who suffer are ethnically Jewish. This has to do with one’s bloodlines, with one’s way of coming into the world, through certain peoples. Within the Jewish community, there are people who are not at all religious, but who are ethnically Jewish.

Within the Jewish community, there are persons who practice all kinds of other faiths and practices. But they are still ethnically Jewish. So that is what is sought here. A special focus category that sets aside a safe space for persons who are ethnically Jewish to find recovery. One of our highest values and Overeaters Anonymous today is unity and diversity.

And of those folk who are ethnically Jewish who are meeting today in various forms, there is an amazing diversity. You might be shocked if you were to see who was there. There are Baptist Jews, there are secular Jews, there are all kinds of ethnic jewish persons who are finding safety and recovery together in spaces that have not yet been officially set aside.

And so what this community is asking is for Overeaters Anonymous to acknowledge for them what has already been acknowledged and allowed for others. And I am ready for questions.

Preston: Thank you. Cee. Maria.

Maria: Would you leave it up to the individual themselves to decide if they’re ethnically Jewish or would there be a kind of a list, would there be a definition of it?

Cee: There would not be any more than there is a definition of who is Asian Pacific or a definition of those who are bipoc or definition of those who are ebony. There are persons in the Ebony Intergroup, I can tell you from having been there quite a few times, of persons who look like you. Who are nonetheless welcome in the Ebony Intergroup. So it is self-defining

Preston: Pat S. yes, please.

Pat S.: Okay, thank you. I’m a little confused in the purpose as far as is this to hold ethnically Jewish meetings to identify yourself as ethnically Jewish and hold them for, specifically for ethnically Jewish meetings.

Cee: The intent is to create a specific focus category entitled Ethnically Jewish. Just as we have Ebony, just as we have bipoc, just as we have Asian Pacific.

Pat S.: Okay. And it’s just for identification purposes.

Cee: I’m not sure I understand the second question.

Pat S.: Because you say because there are other ethnic groups that have been identified. Is that the purpose of being identified as just on the list of specific focus meetings.

Cee: It would create a specific focus category and if passed, that would appear as one of the options in the dropdown menu for persons who might be looking for that level of safety.

Pat S.: Okay. By the same token, the meeting would still be open to anyone that needed an OA meeting, it wouldn’t keep others from not be not attending the meeting.

Cee: As we know, meetings are autonomous and certainly with regard to the Ebony meetings that I have attended, the script is very clear. The format is very clear. The focus of the meeting is very clear and all persons are welcomed to be there.

Thank you.

Preston: Thank you. We’ll take one more question from Hennie, please.

Hennie: Thank you. I think it’s very confusing. I understand it’s about ethnical Jewish people, but it’s confusing because Jewish is also a religion and the other special focus groups don’t cause this kind of confusion. So that’s my problem. And how can we make sure that it’s not confused that it’s about religion, but about an ethnical group when we use the name Jewish.

Cee: I don’t know how to overcome that except through education. You’re right that there is a religious practice called Judaism and there is a people called Jews. 70% of the world’s Jews do not practice Judaism. A lot of people don’t realize that, and as I indicated earlier, many of the persons who are ethnically Jewish practice in other faith traditions. In Buddhism, Baptist, Catholic, but they are nonetheless ethnically Jewish.

So the creation of this group, it doesn’t presume that the persons who are within it practice the religion of Judaism. This motion has nothing to do with religious practice at all. People assume certain things. For years people assume that if you were, if you were Italian in this country, that you were probably Catholic.

And that was never completely true, but it was true for many, but no one assumed that one had to be Catholic, to be Italian, Ayala.

Ayala: Okay, thank you. I don’t understand, they don’t feel safe participating in ethnical mixed groups. It’s because the war situation or something else.

Cee: Not necessarily the war situation. The purpose of the special focus categories is to set aside a place where persons, regardless of ideology and military actions and all of that, can feel safe.

The Ebony meetings have been around for a very long time. Long before there were riots on the streets about race matters in the United States. But there have been issues with regard to persons who look like me, and some of them look like you by the way where people feel that there are things that they can say, where there are ways that they can be, that would not necessarily be well received in mixed places. But as I said all of these different categories of people show up at all of our meetings. They do. We’re simply setting aside some places where there is a higher perceived level of safety and fraternity, understanding. I’m a hundred pounder. I go to meetings all over the place, but when I’m in a hundred pounder meetings, I’m there with people who understand what it is like to walk around in a 300 pound body.

It’s simply a place where I don’t have to explain what that feels like. Does that help?

Preston: Thank you. C. We’re gonna move to our next motion. Cyndy, I’ll have you reset the timer please and Cee, if you can please present. Motion K.

Proposed New Business Motion K

Cee: Motion K. This is a fun one. I don’t know about you, but I am here because food and my addiction to food just brought me to my knees. And I figured out I could not do this by myself. And I tried. God knows I tried to do this by myself. I didn’t want to be here. But what I know today is that I cannot do this by myself. I need you all. So I’m one of those people who was able to go to our convention in Orlando. It was wonderful. I came back telling everybody about how great it was and how I missed them and wish they had been there. This motion understands that, and this motion speaks to the fact that there are many people around the world who, for whatever reason, cannot physically get to the places where we gather in large numbers.

And what it suggests is that every two years we come together as a worldwide body in fellowship, in learning, and all the wonderful things that we do when we are in person. There are people who cannot travel for militaristic and political reasons. There are people who cannot travel because of the expense.

Heaven knows there are many people who cannot travel because of the physical limitations, many of which are brought about by our compulsive eating disorders. Wouldn’t it be wonderful if we could pull together as a worldwide body because we are, and I just want us to always remember that we are a global fellowship.

If we could come together to create a global retreat. We started, I will admit we started out calling it a conference or a convention and after much discussion we ended up calling it a retreat. Wouldn’t it be wonderful if we could come together every two years as a worldwide body? To fellowship together, to learn from one another, to support one another, and to reach out to people who might not reach us in other ways.

We know how to do this. We know how to do this because we’ve been doing it for a while. We know how to do this, COVID forced us to learn how to do global things. We have gotten better and better. Multiple regions are doing worldwide gatherings today, so we know how to do this. This particular motion does call for World Service to make this happen. But certainly there is support throughout our fellowship for making it happen. We want to carry the message and we want to support those within. Every two years a global gathering at a time, and a place to be determined by the Board of Trustees and I will simply add with the support of the many service bodies and regions who have been doing this for a while and know how to do this.

Preston: Are there any questions? Pat S.

Pat S.: Yes. Thank you, Pat S. New Hampshire Intergroup. My question is, we have a virtual region, would this not be better handled by the Virtual Region or by a region? Because I don’t believe that I know that the World Service does the convention every five years.

And I don’t ever remember the World Service doing a retreat. They’ve always been handled by the by the Region or the Intergroup. Would this not be better handled by a Region or the Virtual Region, gathering the resources within the fellowship? Than by handling it through World Service. Because I know that the World Service, when they put on a convention every five years, it’s quite a project. Much of it because it’s in person, but also, we used to have it every year and then every three years, and then it went to five years. And I think it’s specifically because of the amount of work involved. And is this something that World Service should be taking on?

Cee: And that last question is for the body to determine. What we’re saying is, and by the way, let me be very clear, the virtual region is not the only region that knows how to do this. There are other regions that are doing global events that have the experience in doing global events, that are doing a really good job of it. It’s not just the Virtual Region, although we rock and we love doing it, and it’s what we do, but we are not the only ones to know how to do this.

Just ask our siblings in Region Nine. They can tell you about it. But we understand that we do. We understand that retreats have often come from Intergroups and meetings and regions and that kind of thing. What we’re bringing to you is the possibility of World Service doing this. And yes, it is a lot of work.

It is a lot of work, but they wouldn’t be alone because there are regions out there and trusted servants out there who would certainly be available to be part of that planning. But we put it before the body.

Preston: Thank you Cee. We’re gonna take our last two questions. We’ll start with Olivier and followed by Cyndy.

Olivier.: Yes. Thank you very much, Preston. My question is, even though assuming that this motion is adopted what the scenario I’m thinking of will, before many years, but so will be a year where both convention will be held. Isn’t that too much work for one single year?

Has it been considered?

Cee: I’m sorry. Would you please read the, repeat the question?

Oliver: Okay, apologies. At some point there will be if one convention happening every five years and the one every second year, at some point there will be a year where both convention will take place. Isn’t that too much work to have two conventions the same year to worldwide convention?

Cee: Has it been thought of? It has been thought of and talked about and we decided to bring it before the body, for the body to determine that.

Olivier.: Thank you.

Cee: Thank you, Olivier.

Preston: Cindy A. please.

Cindy: Hi, Cindy, a compulsive overeater, Region Two, Santa Cruz Monterey Intergroup. Thank you. Two questions. Why two years? And I think that might have been answered, but I would like a straight on answer for that and why I missed the part of why you called it retreat versus a conference or convention.

Thanks.

Cee: We actually went to the dictionary and looked those words up and what was really happening in the heart and soul of those making this proposal was a global fellowship that a conference includes the doing of business includes protocols and motions and that kind of thing often, but what we had in mind was a coming apart, which is what a retreat is, a spiritual retreat is a coming apart and a being together in a way that we just don’t have very many opportunities to be in this fellowship. The convention comes very close to that but even it has some other things attached to it. But we would just really love to create a place where we come together and love on each other and help people get free of this horrible thing that has bound our lives.

Preston: Thank you Cindy and that concludes our time for that. We did have a few questions in the chat. I think we have time, Cyndy, for a couple of questions from the chat. Is that correct? We need to be done by 12 of the hour.

Cyndy: We are at time, so we need to close the meeting.

Preston: Thank you everyone.

Press the play button below to listen to an audio recording in English or read the translatable transcript below.

BJ: Hi, my name is BJ and I’m your moderator for this session. In this session, we’ll be begin discussing the proposed bylaw amendments 1, 2, and 7 from this year’s agenda questionnaire. Sharlotte will be screen sharing the motions and serving as our timer to help us stay on track. We have three motions to discuss and each motion will last 15 minutes.

I will call on each maker to present their motion. They may read or summarize the motion and briefly explain why they submitted it for consideration. If you have a question, please wait until the maker has finished speaking before raising your electronic hand. Once we move to the question and answer period, raise your hand as soon as you have a question.

I will call on participants in the order they appear on my screen. When called on, please unmute, ask your question and then mute when you’re finished. Each member may ask one question plus one brief clarifying follow up if needed. If you have any additional question, you may raise your hand again and you’ll be called on after others have had an opportunity to speak.

When we reach the end of the 15 minute time limit, we’ll move on to the next motion. If time allows, after all motions have been presented, we’ll open the floor for additional questions Please be clear about which motion you’re asking about. We will conclude this session 10 minutes before the hour to allow time for closing.

Let’s begin with our first motion. Timer, please set the time for 15 minutes. Vasiliki, please present motion one.

Proposed Bylaw Amendment 1

Vassiliki: Hello again. My name is Vasiliki, compulsive overeater, on behalf of the Greek National Service Board, Region Nine. This motion is very simple. It’s about only, replacement of one word. The word board, to the word bodies. We have in our bylaws, five types of service bodies and all five types of service bodies, intergroups, national service boards, language service boards, specific focus service boards and regions, are composed of elected representatives from groups or service bodies that they serve. All five service bodies have a small board of officers elected by their representatives at their assemblies.

It is strange to call some of the service bodies service boards. While for formulation, such as the board of the intergroup or the board of the region are clear, formulation such as the board of the board or the board elected its board seems paradoxical and confusing. The distinction between service board and service body is a distinction, between the entity, of the service body and the small group of officers within those entities. This will help members to understand the real functions of each service body. This function are similar in all five service bodies and, it will, support transparency, inclusive communication, a stronger sense of unity, a consistency between service structure.

More accurate reflection on how our service structure operates in practice. The reason for this motion, is because there are, about, 330 service bodies, which serves, about 5,800 groups. There are only 21 national language and specific focus service boards, so they are not well known, but all the service, bodies, but they have a crucial role, especially in non-English countries for the growth of, OA. I could give, many examples, but, perhaps I’ll leave time for questions. Thank you.

BJ: Are there any questions?

Please go ahead, Sharlotte.

Sharlotte: Sharlotte G. OA member. I’m not sure my questions to BJ, but to make another motion, or maybe it’s even to the chair of the board who I also know is in this room. But the question is, when and if this motion were to pass, would that mean that every. National service board, language service board specific vocal service board would then have to amend their bylaws and the policy manual, and would a period of time be given to allow that to happen? Or would this only apply forward facing for the future? So what would, basically, what would happen with those service bodies that already sit in this category? Does that make sense?

Vassiliki: Yes, as I know after, if that motion passes all service bodies, change their, bylaws in the year after the World Service Business Conference. But, I don’t know.

There are only 21. In several service bodies, these national service bodies, the new terms are familiar because they work as a service bodies. We cannot have a service board of 270 representatives. It is a service body.

BJ: Thank you. I don’t know the answer to that. Sharlotte, so we’ll have to discuss it obviously before conference.

Any more questions for Vassiliki?

Thank you Vassiliki. We’ll go on to the next motion.

Proposed Bylaw Amendment 2

Marsha, please present motion two.

Marsha: Good morning. I’m Marsha. I am from the Hawaii Intergroup, but I am representing the Unity with Diversity Committee as well as the inclusive language subcommittee of that group. This is a group motion and I’m just lucky enough to be the one presenting it. The summary is member groups of Overeaters Anonymous may change the words God, Him, His and Himself when reading the Steps, and also when reading the Traditions.

That’s the summary of what we’re proposing. The history kind of is although most of what we present in OA is presented as a suggestion, and we’re able to, in our groups and service bodies, have our group conscience. The Steps and the Traditions have a special treatment that they are to be treated as an entity entirely unto themselves.

A number of motions have come before the World Service Business Conference over the last decade trying to and somehow make this more inclusive of other belief systems without being able to get that kind of group conscience of having a way of doing that. So this proposal simply says that we can give permission to groups to make those changes, specific changes, as long as we acknowledge that Overeaters Anonymous as a whole treats the Steps and Traditions as that entity. There’s actually language in here that says that, it says exactly what to preface it with. So permission to use the Intergroup Steps; member groups may change the word God, Him, His, Himself, when reading the Traditions or the Steps. The conference approved Twelve Steps or Twelve Traditions can be found and where they’re found and what you are to hear is a modified version by group conscience.

We would need to encourage groups to actually say that. I’m involved with two groups that say that. So very similar at this point. So we’re out of compliance currently and what we’d like to do is bring groups that have by group conscience made these minor changes that are major to the people involved to make it okay to do so. Bring us into alignment with what’s actually happening in our groups and in some groups, and while still allowing those throughout the world that need to continue to have the Steps and Traditions just exactly as they are, can do that as well. So this would involve no print changes, no literature changes, just simply that acknowledgement that that it’s okay to make these minor changes in order to have the group feel totally inclusive. And I’ve been fumbling around. I’ll just open it to questions.

BJ: Thank you Marsha. Alana, please go ahead with your question.

Alana: Hi there, I’m Alana. I’m the Region One chair. Don’t groups already have the autonomy to do what you’re saying without the endorsement of World Service, considering that World Service doesn’t actually govern how meetings are run?

Marsha: No. This has been thoroughly researched and actually those groups that do that with the Steps or the Traditions are out of compliance with the World Service policies. And this is a bylaw change to allow that to be in alignment.

BJ: Bruce, go ahead, please.

Bruce: Thanks. Compulsive eater from Ottawa, Ontario. My name is Bruce. Because this is amending Articles I and II of subpart B, is this subject to the higher standard of the amending formula.

Marsha: I’m not familiar with that higher standard and we’d have to go back to others to figure that out.

BJ: Do you wanna clarify that, Bruce, what you’re speaking to about the higher standard?

Bruce: Yeah. If we wanted to change the Steps or Traditions, then it requires the two thirds majority at the delegation, and then we need to go to all the groups and get, I think it’s three quarters of all the groups to say yes including the regions and other service boards.

I know here we’re not changing the Steps themselves, but we are changing the articles, so that’s the clarification that I would be looking for.

Marsha: I don’t know that clarification. We know the difference. Yeah. We’ve addressed that thoroughly in the committee and in the subcommittee. And the understanding is that this motion does not need that higher standard, that this motion simply aligns our practice because we’re not changing the Steps, we’re not changing the Traditions. We’re just simply stating that if you as a group choose to make these modifications, you may do so as long as you acknowledge that you’re doing that. That’s all there is in that. If someone were to question that and go back through that process, this committee has been going through that process for longer than I’ve been on it.

And really believe that this particular motion, the way it’s written and the thought that went into this before my tenure on this committee that has been addressed in a thorough manner. If you don’t feel it has, then we’d need to go back and try to figure out where the committee has gone awry there.

But I don’t believe that it has, I think this has been thoroughly researched to the point where this motion can be passed or rejected as is.

BJ: Okay, let’s go to Carrie’s question and then we have Bob next that might be able to shine some light on what we’ve been discussing about.

So, Carrie, go ahead, please.

Carrie: Hi. I Carrie from the Greater Intergroup of Detroit. I’m very confused about it too because when you say that it’s out of alignment, I know there are legal ramifications and well permission given OA from AA to use these. So I’m not real clear. The only thing I heard was you can do it if it’s not in print. But then when you start printing your meeting formats and things like that, does that cross the line? So I’m just not really clear on where we’re at with the legality of this.

Marsha: My understanding from the research that’s been done is that since we are not printing at the World Service level anything, we’re not making any changes at the World Service level that we are just simply giving permission to groups to, with the disclaimer, make those specific minor changes that are just affecting the deity that that there is no legal ramification. That this is within the framework of what’s been approved in the past and within our documents and our legal operation, that we can do this. But anything more than this if World Service were to start printing or whatever, that this would be a change only, the only printing would be that it would be a change in the meeting format, which is a suggestion and can be modified by groups. So it’s only a change to that documentation. There’s no other legal changes.

Carrie: Do you know if in AA, any AA groups have done this kind of thing?

Marsha: Oh, absolutely. I know several groups that have, and as I’ve discussed this in Hawaii, it’s widespread here that AA groups and our 11 OA groups, many of them make these kinds of changes, actually more extensive changes.

Carrie: Are they in compliance?

Marsha: That’s the thing, is they are in compliance with AA as far as everyone believes. I’m not involved in the AA service, so I just have been talking to AA people quite a bit because I wanted to understand. What people do versus what’s legal. And this is a step towards making at least this piece of the deity because deities do differ greatly from groups, from various groups. So if we change in a group setting only, if we change the pronouns or if we change the word God.

BJ: Marsha, if we can just pause for a minute and then I’d like to take in these two remainder questions. Thanks. Please go ahead Bob as Chair of our Board of Trustees.

Bob: Thanks BJ. Hi everyone. I did pose this question to our parliamentarian when we had initial discussions on the motion whether or not it would have to go to the groups or could it just be something that we as a body would approve.

And he did say, because, as Bruce had alluded to earlier, because it does change the Articles I and II, and that is how that higher level approval is written. If there’s any change to it doesn’t say to the Step or Tradition, it’s just that it says any change to Article I or Article II, it must go to the groups for ratification at that level. So again, that was the answer. So if this does get adopted by the body at the World Service Business Conference, it will need to go to the groups after the fact. Thanks.

BJ: That clarified everything. Any more questions after that clarification? Go ahead Gary.

Gary: Marcia, two things. First I heard you say that we’re just changing the pronouns, and then I heard you say that you were changing the diety and I don’t think that’s a minor change.

I just wanna be clear which one you’re talking about. Changing the diety really changes the meaning of the steps as they’re written. That’s the first question.

Marsha: Okay. So member groups of Overeaters Anonymous may change the words, God, Him, His, and Himself when reading these Traditions or these Steps. It’s two parts. The main change that’s tried and come very close to being passed.

Gary: What you’re reading now, is that part of the motion?

Marsha: I read the motion and then I said that God, all of the discussion is around potentially higher power, which is what…

Gary: Right. But if this motion were to pass, if somebody wanted to change the word God to Steven, could they?

Marsha: If it by group conscience.

Gary: Okay. That’s the first question. Second question is, my understanding is AA has given OA very generously has given OA and other Twelve Step fellowships the right to change either word, alcohol to food or sex or whatever.

Did anybody check with AA? If that, is that right? Transfers to groups and is not just for the World Service?

Marsha: I believe so. I know that there’ve been a lot of conversations with AA. So if that was one of the concerns that it was before me.

BJ: Thank you, Marsha. Okay, so timer, please reset the time.

It looks like we’ll have time to circle back on this one. C please present motion seven.

Proposed Bylaw Amendment 7

Cee: Thank you, Cee Z., Chair Virtual Region. We believe that this is a very simple and uncomplicated request. The way that Subpart B, Article IX, Section Three as read, includes the words such as the region vice chair, and what we’re asking for is to strike that so that the intent is actually honored. So simply it allows for this motion, allows for the region chair to select an alternate to represent the region when he or she is not available. This is coming from the virtual region, because it’s actually happened in our region and I was selected as the alternate delegate, I was not the vice chair. The original wording doesn’t say that it has to be the vice chair. It simply presents that as an example of who might go, so what we’re asking is to eliminate the words such as the region vice chair, because it’s irrelevant. It can be whoever the chair designates. So we’re simply trying to clean that up so that no one feels that they are bound by the suggestion.

BJ: Thank you. Any questions?

Sari: Compulsive overeater still, is it written somewhere else or is it from where the chair can choose his, replacement? Because the vice chair is an example. Is there anywhere else in the bylaws that says, from where the chair can choose his, replacement?

Cee: You’re asking if there’s any place other than this section where the region chair can choose the replacement their representative rather. That’s what you’re asking doesn’t show up anywhere else? I’m not qualified to answer that question.

BJ: Any other questions on this motion? Thank you Cee. So we will go till 12 till the hour. So are there any other questions on what we’ve discussed. Any other bylaws? Sharlotte, please go ahead.

Follow-up Discussion

Sharlotte: Thank you very much. My question relates to, the motion change, allowing, the verbal change to the steps and the traditions and by extension, the other motions are before the conference that have a similar effect to change these two sections. My question, is more for the board of trustees chair, than the maker of the motion. So I’ll ask it and if it’s appropriate, if it can be answered. The question is, so I served on reference two years, three years, no, two years ago when a, the first version of this motion was adopted and we made a recommendation to not adopt because we didn’t have the information we needed from AA.

Then a motion came last year. With the same effect and no information was provided around what AA will allow and what they want. And I see a third year now where such, action is being taken, but without that information being provided. So is it possible prior to the Conference for the Board of Trustees to issue communication? After communicating with AA on what the fellowship can and cannot do with the Twelve Steps and Twelve Traditions, because we cannot make an informed group conscience without that information. So can that information be provided?

BJ: Bob, do you wanna speak to that?

Bob: Sharlotte, I’m just making a note. I appreciate it being brought up again. I know it’s been discussed in the past and I know it’s been unclear. I’ll have that discussion and see if there’s something that can be done to bring some clarity to it prior to the Conference. I don’t disagree, it makes sense to have that. I don’t know if we’ll receive anything, but certainly we can ask. I appreciate you bringing that up now so we can maybe have some finality to it prior to Conference. Thank you.

BJ: Any other questions? Sounds like you guys wanna have the rest of your weekend off.

Press the play button below to listen to an audio recording in English or read the translatable transcript below.

Preston: In this session, we’ll be discussing the proposed bylaw amendments 3, 4, 5, and 6. From this year’s agenda questionnaire, Cyndy will be screen sharing the motions and serving as our timer to help us stay on track. We have four motions to discuss and each motion will last 12 minutes. I will call each maker to present their motion.

They may read or summarize the motion and briefly explain why they submitted for consideration. If you have a question, please wait until the maker is finished speaking before raising your electronic hand. Once you move to the question and answer period, raise your hand as soon as you have a question. I will call participants in the order they appear on my screen.

When called on, please unmute, ask your question, then mute when you are finished. Each member may ask one question plus one brief clarifying follow up if needed. If you have an additional question, you may raise your hand again and be called on after others have had an opportunity to speak. When we reach the 12 minute time limit, we will move on to the next motion. If time allows, after all motions have been presented, we will open the floor for additional questions.

Please be clear about which motion you are asking about. We must conclude this session 10 minutes before the hour to allow time for closing. Let’s begin with our first motion. Timer, please set the time for 12 minutes. Cassandra, please present motion 3.

Proposed Bylaw Amendment 3

Cassandra: Yes. Thank you. Cassandra, Emotional eater, bulimic, restrictor.

So the ABOA Service Board would like to propose to amend the Bylaws Subpart B, Article II, Twelve Traditions, Tradition Five as follows. The current wording is Tradition Five, Each group has but one primary purpose to carry its message to the compulsive overeater who still suffers. We are moving to have this read, each group has but one primary purpose to carry its message to the compulsive eater who still suffers.

The intent is to bring this in line with the Third Tradition, which is The only requirement, for membership, is a desire to stop eating compulsively. And also in line with the OA Preamble. Which says We welcome everyone who wants to stop eating compulsively.

Yes. So the rationale is that, Overeaters Anonymous welcomes those who have various manifestations of eating disorders. I believe that the intent there is in Tradition Three.

The only requirement for eating compulsively. Our introduction to the Twelve Steps in the OA Twelve Steps and Twelve Traditions says we use compulsive overeating and compulsive eating interchangeably. These terms include, but are not limited to overeating, undereating, food addiction, et cetera. So the intent to make it more inclusive. I would leave it there. Yeah.

Preston: Thank you, Cassandra. Are there any questions? Please raise your electronic hand. Maria.

Maria: Maria, compulsive overeater from, Wales. If this gets changed here, does it mean you’re gonna have to change OA into Eaters Anonymous rather than Overeaters Anonymous? Will it not be a logical conclusion?

Cassandra: No, I disagree. Narcotics Anonymous, for example. Alcohol is also a drug. Narcotics Anonymous does not specify what type of drug. Of course, there are fellowships like Crystal Meth Anonymous, and there is Alcoholics Anonymous. But, again, I believe that the intent of the Twelfth Step, even going back to AA, was to make the tent a little wider spiritual program.

So I think this falls in line with just the being more inclusive. It does not mean a change in, the name of the fellowship but I think it makes for an attractive program for a newcomer who may not be overweight or struggle with weight or be an overeater to see in both the Steps as we’ll see later in another motion, but in the Traditions, just again, being inclusive of all.

Preston: Thank you, Pat. S.

Pat S.: Pat S., New Hampshire Intergroup. My question is, why do you feel it’s necessary? Having what you saying, realizing what you’ve just said about, it’s in the Preamble. It’s the second sentences in the Preamble. Even though we say we’re compulsive overeating. In the very second sentence it says we welcome all who want to stop eating compulsively.

It’s in the Third Step. Why do you feel that we have to change the Fifth Step when it’s already in our literature that all are welcome in the fellowship?

Cassandra: So I believe it’s, inconsistent. Tradition Five says, carry the message to the compulsive overeater, yet Tradition Three says, the requirement is a desire to stop eating compulsively. So yes, we in program know that again, like OA Twelve and Twelve Introduction to Twelve Steps says we use the terms compulsive overeating and compulsive eating interchangeably.

But I believe some clarity and consistency there, would be a benefit. Just removing four letters over eating to eating.

Pat S.: So my follow up question is, even though we are Overeaters Anonymous, you see this as a conflict between Step Three and Step Five.

Cassandra: We’re not speaking on a Step Five, Admitted to ourselves, God and another human being, the exact nature of our wrong.

Pat S.: Oh, I’m sorry.

Cassandra: That’s okay. So, Tradition Three. Do I see a conflict? Was that correct?

Pat S.: Yes.

Cassandra: It’s a, yeah, it’s a bit inconsistent. Yeah. To stop eating compulsively versus the compulsive overeater.

It’s a little limiting to specify compulsive overeater and yet, in other parts of our literature, say, we welcome all those who want to stop eating compulsively.

Pat S.: And you don’t feel that is, that covers the bases of compulsive overeating and compulsive eating, that everybody is included, whether you’re a compulsive overeater?

Preston: Cassandra, this is answer. We’re gonna go to the next one. Thank you.

Pat S.: Okay. Thank you.

Preston: Did you want to answer that, Cassandra? Thank you.

Cassandra: Sure. If I, remember the question. Do I feel if it covers all bases? I think it’s important to have clarity and again, language is very important here. There are, expand this to other motions, there are other aspects of program where language is important, higher power. I’m getting out of the scope here, but yes, I think it’s important to have some clear language. Better be more inclusive by saying compulsive eater than to be narrow and more limiting, which is compulsive overeater. And that might get someone out of the rooms. Well, I’m not an overeater. Does this mean this is not for me and leave program entirely. So again, I think it’s inclusive, I think it’s attractive. I think it would benefit the fellowship. Thanks.

Preston: Thank you Cassandra, Rhonda J.

Rhonda J.: Thank you. Thank you, Cassandra. I’m in agreement with, what you’re proposing here, but I, after reading these, proposed bylaw changes, I noticed when I was reading Our Invitation to You at a meeting that both compulsive eater and compulsive overeater is used in that document.

And that’s still, I just printed it off the website and it’s still true. My question is, is if this passes, will you consider changing the OA invitation, Our Invitation to You, to just be consistent with compulsive eater throughout the body of that document. because right now they’re mixed and I was just curious.

Okay. Thank you. That’s all.

Cassandra: Well, thank you for that question. It’s a great question. Well, I’d have to refer to the AB Service Board, I can’t speak for the board, you know, as far as a conscience that the, board has. But, thank you for raising that. Perhaps we missed that. I wonder if I should answer personally, if I could change that, on a personal note. I think it would be of benefit, given everything that I’ve explained and given the intention of the motion, the rationale of the motion. Thanks.

Preston: Thank you, Nancy. H

Nancy H.: Oh, thank you. I’m Nancy H, a compulsive eater and a food addict too. Yeah. Thank you Cassandra. I appreciate the discussion on this and I guess I’ve learned over the years that change happens incrementally and it just seems that most of a lot of our literature and documents are really have that the term eater and compulsive overeater.

So throughout, so it seems that, do you feel that this change would help us to achieve that message in Tradition Five, which I personally think is one of the most important Traditions we have. Would it sort of make it more welcoming and help us to achieve and reach out to a greater population?

Cassandra: So making sure I understand the question, do I feel that changing the language in the literature throughout? Is that right?

Nancy H.: I’m asking, it would be nice to change it in the literature throughout, but in this specific motion do you think it would help to achieve the intent of Tradition Five more closely?

Cassandra: Yes. I believe so, yes. Being to carry the message to those struggling with compulsive eating, as a whole, I think it really is very, very much connected. Yes. This motion to change Five is very much connected to the intent of Tradition. Five. Thank you, yes.

Nancy H.: Alright. Thank you, Cassandra.

Preston: Thank you Nancy.

Melanie.

Melanie: Hi. I was wondering the cost. I think I seen unknown, and I think that the cost is very important to know of how much it’s gonna cost the fellowship and to change the Traditions in every basic literature that we have.

Cassandra: That is a fantastic question. I don’t know if the fellowship, I’m not sure whether that can be based off of the printing of second editions and things like that and how much changes between a first and a second edition.

Certainly it would be gradual. We wouldn’t demand it change by next week or next month, as the stock of the current literature phases out to then., An OA service board who may be more knowledgeable on that may have more specific response to that.

Preston: Okay. Thank you Cassandra. We run outta time for more questions. Let’s move forward. Let’s see here. Danielle, please present motion 4.

Proposed Bylaw Amendment 4

Danielle: Hi, I’m Danielle recovering anorexic and bulimic. I am representing our motion the current wording says Having had a spiritual way awakening as the result of these Steps, we tried to carry this message to compulsive overeaters and to practice these principles in all our affairs. So we are proposing to change, again, similar to the last motion that was presented to change overeaters to eaters. With the same rationale.

So the intent is it’s a similar intent to bring the language more consistent with the Third Tradition and the OA preamble first, and then also again, to make the language more inclusive for the portion of the fellowship, which is quite a large portion who have other variations of our same shared disease.

So the anorexic, the bulimics, the restrictors the exercise bulimics, the orthorexic, there’s just name the malady and it exists. And having been in the rooms for a while, having been a newcomer in OA feeling a feeling of inclusivity in the beginning can make a huge impact on whether or not my recovery, my abstinence starts today or if it starts in 10 years.

And it’s unfortunate that our disease can divide us by just one word, but it does, and it has, and we see it happen often in AB meetings. Being a sponsor, being in, the fellowship with other newcomers, it is triggering, I’ll say. It is triggering. And yes our goal is to live in the world and eventually to be in the world and to have none of these things trigger us or bother us to the degree that they do when we first enter.

But the truth is that everybody is a newcomer and everybody comes as a newcomer. And in order for us to make it a little bit more inclusive for those members that really don’t have the compulsive overeating we recommend and, we propose to change the language so that it is more in alignment with other parts of the literature that already exist.

Preston: Thank you, Danielle. Are there any questions? Penny?

Penny: Hi, I’m an Overeater Anonymous myself, and, I joined, OA as Overeaters Anonymous and have found my recovery in many ways. To me it seems that our literature so far is based on overeaters. Most texts are based on, overeaters. Most members who have written are overeaters and I know that there are a lot of members who are anorexic too.

But I believe that us in having different addictions when I think, it is a different addiction. And the same way I cannot sponsor a person who is, an alcoholic or an has an addiction with drugs and narcotics anonymous. I think that, uh, that motion should not pass. Thank you.

Preston: Penny are you asking a question or are you making a statement?

Penny: I’m making a statement.

Preston: Okay. This is time for questions. Thank you.

Penny: Yes. My question would be how would over literature help an anorexic person?

Danielle: So let me just make sure that I’m understanding the question correctly. Speaking directly to the literature, you’re asking, why would an anorexic want to affiliate themselves with a program that doesn’t seem to be in alignment with their addiction?

Am I understanding that correctly?

Penny: Yes, exactly.

Danielle: Well, a lot of us, me, myself, being in recovery from anorexia and having been in recovery for a while, I understand that the root of the problem today, I understand this, I did not understand this when I first entered the rooms, but that the root of the problem was not the food.

The food was actually never the problem. It was my disconnect with higher power. It was all of the things that I’ve learned in this program. However, I did believe that it was, and so the obsession with food and food behaviors is something that we all share as an anorexic, as a bulimic, as a compulsive eater, as a compulsive exerciser, we are all here today because we couldn’t stop thinking about how many or little calories we were consuming. I don’t think it’s necessarily, and I’m not laughing to laugh at the question, but I think today most of us here know that the food isn’t a problem.

But when we first got here, hearing that other people who do overeat, let’s say, also struggle with an obsession with food and how many calories and how many steps I walked today and X, Y, and Z. We have a shared disease. The purpose of the program, is to bring us all together regardless of how our disease manifests today or in 10 years, or 10 years ago.

And I hope that answers the question.

Preston: Thank you, Carol.

Carol: Hi. Thank you to Danielle and Cassandra for these motions. Do you feel that changing the words overeater to eater in these two instances, and I’ll just talk about Danielle’s in this instance, would facilitate and strengthen member retention because of the inclination when people, if they don’t hear what they wanna hear right away, they start a new fellowship or they go to a different one. Would it help with member retention in your view?

Danielle: I believe that it would, because I’ve spoken to lots of newcomers. Newcomers that are looking for, we call it AB, newcomers are looking for anorexic, bulimic, compulsive exerciser meetings and who do really get triggered and don’t come back all the time.

Honestly, in the last several years of online Zoom meetings, we see people from all over the world. Thankfully we see people from all over the world in our meetings and there are a lot who don’t come back. Having been the newcomer contact for a few different meetings they share with me, “it’s just hard for me because everybody’s saying compulsive overeating, and my problem is that I restrict.” Whether they’re anorexic or not. My problem is restricting or my problem is this or that, or this. So I do, yes. The short answer is I do feel that it would only having experienced lots of newcomers fall off.

Preston: Thank you, Maria K.

Marie: Hello? I’m Maria and I’m a compulsive overeater. I’ve many times thought of this myself about the overeating, although we mean basically compulsive eating disorders, and I understand the need for a consistency in the language. Although the arguments of people feeling excluded that aren’t overeaters, they’ve already come to a fellowship that’s called Overeaters Anonymous.

My question is, is if we’re going to go with a pattern of being consistent. Do, we not have to be consistent with the name of our fellowship? And sometimes, like the inconsistency actually is inclusive because you come to the fellow through the literature on the Steps, you hear overeater, then you hear eater, compulsive eater, eating compulsively.

You actually hear it all and then you actually hear the inclusivity about having anorexic bulimics, included. Maybe it’s enough, because otherwise, if you exclude the word overeater from everywhere, then you have no reason to actually name the fellowship Overeaters Anonymous.

Danielle: So thank you for that question. I feel that, first of all, the organization as it’s been established, has been established for quite a long time, and so I don’t like to call it the brand, but it has a brand and we all know that it does. And so changing a brand is not what a lot of organizations do, but they do change their marketing materials, right?

They change a lot of things underneath the name to either appeal to a new demographic or whatever it may be. Not to say that this is a marketing tactic. However, in regards to member retention, in regards to really actually the desire to share the recovery and the fellowship with other people.

Changing the parts underneath the parts under the hood is what we are suggesting. Definitely not suggesting changing the name of the organization to Eaters Anonymous. No, it’s really just sort of these little parts that we read every day in meetings or read every day if we’re reading literature every day. For some of the members it may just feel a bit or a lot, i’m not gonna candy coat this, a bit or a lot, exclusive of maybe the condition that they’re in. And me having been, like I said, all of the things and really seriously, restrictor and these sorts of things. I can just attest for the amount of recovery that this program has offered me personally. And if we can make that easier for someone to experience recovery that I have shared, that we’ve all shared, that’s the ultimate goal in this motion.

Preston: Thank you, Maria. Cassandra,

Cassandra: Thank you. Cassandra, emotional eater, bulimic, restricter. Hi Danielle. I believe you answered this perhaps already. As a newcomer, I come in and I hear intently the readings. Can you just remind me what are some of the introductory readings in a meeting?

Danielle: What I’m saying is that, a lot of times we do read the Traditions and we read the Steps at the beginning of, at least all the AB meetings that I go to.

That’s what we start with. We start with the Steps and we start with the Traditions. It is the second thing that we’re doing in the first 10 minutes of our hour and a half meeting, or hour and 15 minute meeting, or however long the meeting might be. So it is an every day, every meeting thing that, they’re hearing, compulsive overeater and so yeah, it can right off the bat sort of just feel challenging to stay in the same way that Cassandra mentioned.

Not to crosstalk, but in the same way, higher power may seem offensive to some of our members and maybe a large portion of our members or God may seem offensive or just hard to palate, the overeater as opposed to eater can just sort of seem a little, a little bit hard to, to palate. Thank you.

Preston: Thank you.

Cassandra. Pat S.

Pat S.: Thank you Pat S., New Hampshire Intergroup. I have a question in response to what Danielle said about people who came to a meeting and may have been bulimics, or are anorexics and didn’t come back. Have you found that to be true of someone who was also a compulsive overeater and didn’t come back to the meeting?

Danielle: You’re saying? In a general meeting?

Pat S.: Yes.

Danielle: Or in a anorexic. So I haven’t been the newcomer contact for a general OA meeting. Typically been the newcomer contact for an AB meeting. So I’m not able to speak to that question unfortunately. I’m sorry.

Pat S.: So my follow up question is, that the meetings that you attend are basically all anorexic bulimic special focus meetings and not general OA meetings?

Danielle: No. I also attend general OA meetings. I just do service at the AB meetings and for the AB Service Board.

Pat S.: And at those meetings, have you found that people that were compulsive overeaters didn’t come back to the meeting?

Danielle: To the AB meetings?

Pat S.: No, to the, if a compulsive overeater went to a regular meeting,

’cause you say you go to regular meetings as well as AB meetings, right?

Danielle: Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm.

Pat S.: Have you found that compulsive people who are say obese, come to an OA open meeting and not come back?

Danielle: Definitely, there’s definitely lots.

Pat S.: So there’s, there’s no difference between the two.

Preston: Okay. We’re, we’re at time right now, so we’re gonna move forward. Thank you both.

Pat S.: Thank you.

Preston: Thank you. Danielle. Okay. Next. Here is Lisa. Please present motion 5.

Proposed Bylaw Amendment 5

Lisa T: Thank you. Lisa, compulsive eater in recovery. Okay. This is a change to the mechanism for changing Steps or Traditions. We are suggesting one simple change that instead of it being at least 55% of the registered groups that respond, that it’d be at least 55% of the registered service bodies that respond.

Our reason for proposing this is it seems to us that there’s a longstanding, kind of insurmountable, difficulty of direct communication between the World Service Office and the groups. The amount of out of date contact information and groups that no longer exist, but we don’t know makes the current rule basically a, it kind of reminds me of poll tax rule. You know, yes, technically you can make the change, but, if you have the, if you have the rules for changing so difficult that nobody can actually do it. What you’re really saying is no, you’re not allowed to change and it looks like we might have that kind of situation. Not because we believe that was what the early people in OA thought, but they didn’t realize how difficult it was gonna be in the, how old are we now? In our sixties? How hard it would be to keep in contact with the groups in order to be able to make these changes.

We believe it’s really important for there to be a mechanism for change because language changes over time. I noticed there was a previous discussion in the first hour about, whether or not telephone should be a tool anymore that should be changed to something else. Now, of course, that isn’t in the Steps, but if we decided that, but if it were in the Steps, it would be, it might be impossible for us to make the change no matter how much we wanted to. If 100% of every group that was contacted wanted to make the change, but we couldn’t get in contact with 55% of them, we’d never be able to make any changes.

And that seems like a setup for real problems with communication with our actual groups that are trying to communicate with us. I’m ready for questions.

Preston: Thank you. Hennie V.

Hennie: I thought that last year, the same article was subject of the World Business Conference. So why do we try to amend it, now again?

Lisa T: Thank you for your question. This is a different motion. The correct me if I’m wrong, but believe it was two years ago, the two years ago, motion was about eliminating the percentage of groups that needed to respond.

Do I have that correct? We are not suggesting removing that. We still believe that it’s important that we, make wholesale efforts to get in contact with the majority of the fellowship. But the method for getting in touch with the majority of the fellowship should be through the service bodies, not through the individual groups, because we just don’t have the communication infrastructure.

Preston: Thank you. Melanie.

Melanie: What happens to the voice of the unaffiliated groups?

Lisa T: I would say that any group that wanted to have a voice could, so what are the requirements for being an Intergroup? I guess you have to have two groups, right? Or can just one group be an Intergroup?

Hennie: When you join, a group joins OA, they register, but they have a choice to affiliate with an Intergroup or not.

Lisa T: Right, but if I form an Intergroup, that Intergroup can just be one group. Can it not? Or it has to have two?

Unknown: It has to have 2 groups.

Lisa T: Okay. So yes, they would have to have, they would have to have a second group, but I believe they can say Monday is one group, Tuesday is another group.

Preston: Okay. Let’s move forward. Pat.

Pat S.: Yes. Pat S, New Hampshire Intergroup. With regard to, the motion, does this not put the decision into fewer hands than the previous. I see this motion as coming about with the same result that was voted down last year when it was presented to the fellowship. And I think that the question that was made about what happens with the unaffiliated groups, if they’re unaffiliated and they don’t have that contact, you still have, if you’re putting it in the hands of the service bodies, is it not giving the the decision making to five service bodies instead of to the entire fellowship?

Lisa T: Thank you for your question. Let’s see. For one thing, service bodies is really large. It’s not regions. Regions are a service body, but that would be Regions, that would be National Service Boards, that would be Language Service Boards. That would be all of the Intergroups. It would be all of the Specific Focus Service Boards.

It’s a lot of, it’s not just a small number. I’m so glad you asked that question. Yeah. Service bodies is really big. And my, my understanding is, that, World Service still has a hard time getting communication with service bodies. When they send out questions they don’t always get a great response rate even from the service bodies.

Pat S.: And so we’re putting something in the hands of the service bodies. If they’re not responding to World Service, wouldn’t it be better to have World Service be the one to make the contacts to the groups?

Lisa T: Wait, I don’t understand your question.

Pat S.: Well, you just stated that the World Service Office had difficulty getting responses from some service bodies.

Cyndy: Excuse me. I believe we’re into debate here.

Pat S.: I’m just trying to get clarification.

Cyndy: I assure you, Pat, I believe Lisa’s done her best to answer you.

Pat S.: Okay. Thank you.

Lisa T: I believe that they’ve had a much, much more difficult time getting ahold of groups. I’m gonna go ahead and address the issue. If a service body goes out of commission, there are still groups that maybe were affiliated with it and they go join other service bodies.

When a group ends I can’t imagine there being someone, it’s not like the last one out the door locks it. The meeting doesn’t exist anymore. No one feels a responsibility to go tell OA, this meeting doesn’t exist anywhere. So that’s what creates, I would assume over the years, more and more and more dead meetings, not ’cause we’re dying, but just because of the nature of the interaction.

Thank you.

Preston: Thank you Sandy C.

Sandy G: Hi. Yeah, Sandy. Lisa I, it’s a math question. So does each and every entity that’s defined as the service body get one vote. I mean, there’s an awful lot of things to think about here because the virtual region has 23 intergroups and three service boards. So then does every one of those get a vote? But this intergroup has 200 meetings and this intergroup has 20 meetings and, what’s the plan? Love.

Lisa T: So just reading right from it. I guess the short answer is yes, that of all of those, of all of those entities, and of course I belong to multiple entities and so me too, as most of us do.

Sandy G: Yeah.

Lisa T: But, of the ones is provided that 55% of the registered service bodies respond. 75% of them need to say, okay, this is a change we’re okay with.

Sandy G: So that’s one vote per service.

Lisa T: One vote, one vote per service body.

Sandy G: Yeah. Gotcha.

Lisa T: Thank you. Right now it’s one vote per group, so the 200 person group has the same vote as the group that’s me and my friend and my other friend.

Sandy G: Yeah. Uhhuh. Not sure about that, but Okay. We’ll try it.

Preston: Thanks. All right. Thank you Lisa. We’re gonna move forward. We’re at time. Cyndy, please present motion 6.

Proposed Bylaw Amendment 6

Cyndy: Hi, I am Cyndy and I’m a compulsive eater, and I’m the current Trustee, Co-chair of the Bylaws Committee. The motion is coming from the Bylaws Committee and the concept is to discontinue the Bylaws Committee as a Conference committee and only have the Reference Subcommittee proceed.

Of that group of people, the Reference Subcommittee is made up of two fellows from every region and their job, every year at Conference, is to be available to the member, to the Conference itself and to the Chair and to help. If we get three motions, we get the reference committee involved in helping to smooth the water so that we come up with one cohesive amendment rather than three separate ideas trying to bring them together. So the Reference Subcommittee serves that purpose. But the Bylaws Committee, their job is to come up with a project to work on and there’s only so many projects you can come up with for bylaws to make them more important or more education or more anything. And we have a lot of those types of documents already. So the thought is that we can free up quite a few people to go serve on other committees, keep the reference committee in play, and have a small subset of that committee elected from within that committee to serve the purpose of assisting. Say somebody comes and they want a help with writing a motion, we would use that small subset for that purpose, but we wouldn’t be tying up 22 people just for the purpose of trying to come up with another idea, making another widget, so to speak.

So that’s the purpose of the motion, is to discontinue the bylaws committee and just use the part that’s utilized at the Conference as far as the Reference Subcommittee goes. And then they would become the Reference Committee instead of the subcommittee. Open for questions.

Preston: Thank you, Cyndy. Are there any questions? Pat S.

Pat S.: Thanks. I thank you, Cyndy, for that explanation. I’m a little confused in, are you eliminating the bylaws committee altogether, or is it going to be a subcommittee?

The Bylaws Committee would cease to exist, and only the Reference Committee would be active. That way they’re not obligated to perform as a committee coming up with projects.

Pat S.: Okay. Now, as you stated, the reference committee had a very specific focus, which was to pull amendments together. Now if the reference committee is going to be. The main committee, and we are not going to have a bylaws committee, and there needs to be maybe a bylaw change. Who does that? And if it’s the reference committee, are they not in conflict with their purpose as far as having to make decisions about their proposal with amendments that might be coming from the floor?

Cyndy: A great question. Not necessarily something. Normally the people that would remain on the committee would be there to assist other entities not necessarily to write it. There is a I believe a small section in there that they would review like every three years they would go through and make recommendations to the Board for things that did need to be changed.

But they would not be responsible for those motions.

Pat S.: So who would do that?

Cyndy: The Board of Trustees would make the change to the motions and would present the motions and the Reference would just simply work on the motions if they should end up coming to the reference committee at conference. If there’s three amendments, then they would have to work through that issue.

I hear what you’re asking. I don’t have a better answer.

Pat S.: Thank you.

Preston: Thank you. Nancy.

Nancy H.: Hi, I am Nancy, compulsive eater. Thank you Cyndy, for presenting this and I guess, and maybe you did answer this with Pat’s question, but having just served on a bylaws committee for our intergroup for a year and we updated bylaws that were about 10 years old. And it was an extensive project, and it was a lot to do. So I’m just wondering if it ever came to that point, let’s just say five years down the line, or I’m not sure what is indicated, how often the bylaws have to be reviewed, but I’m wondering how a situation like that would be handled where there might be an extensive review of the bylaws and how would that be accomplished?

Cyndy: The people that give service in that manner, usually are looking at that information on their own. And then they take their ideas maybe to their own personal intergroup. They take their, ideas to their service boards. It does not have to come from the Bylaws Committee to make changes to the bylaws.

The bylaws really belong to the fellowship, and most of the changes should come from the fellowship, not the bylaws committee or the trustees for that matter. However, the trustees do keep track and recommend changes that they see are required. So the reduction of the Bylaws Committee itself, I do not see as an hindrance to keeping the bylaws up to date.

Preston: Thank you, Nancy. Are there more questions?

Cyndy: We are at time.

Preston: Great. Okay. Thank you Cyndy. We’re at time. Please stop recording. Please return to the main room or you’re free to leave the workshop. And thank you for joining us today.

Press the play button below to listen to an audio recording in English or read the translatable transcript below.

Cyndy: Did you enjoy your sessions? Resolve any problems you might have? Good. I’m glad to see that there’s some thumbs up out there that says this works.

Unknown: Very good for me. A another few questions that I might ask in the next Meet the Maker.

Unknown2: Where is the contact information? It doesn’t appear to be on the Agenda Questionnaire Summary.

Cyndy: There are two documents out on the Conference page under important documents. One is Proposal for Bylaw Amendments and the other is Proposal for Business Motions

Sandy Z: The way that you can, if you want contact information, for a motion, you can email the office at info@oa.org. Or you can call us and we would be happy to provide you with that information, but we can’t put contact information online.

Cyndy: I didn’t think of that because the copies I have does include the information based on another committee meeting that we had. So I apologize for giving out bad information, but contacting the World Service Office will get you in touch with the maker of the motion. Thank you all for your participation today in the Meet the Make sessions. Please remember, if you want to contact the maker of a specific motion, send an email through info@oa.org and you will be sent information so you can make direct contact with the maker of the motion.

We look forward to receiving your service body’s Agenda Questionnaire. The submission deadline is February 19 at 11:59 PM Mountain Time. So please include comments on any motion when completing the questionnaire. These comments assist the Chair of the board and the Reference Subcommittee when we’re reviewing the work. Once recordings are posted on oa.org, please share them with your service body, other people that you know that might have an interest in what we’re working on here today.

So I would like to close this meeting with the responsibility pledge and then the Serenity Prayer.

“Always to extend the hand and heart of OA with those who share my compulsion. For this, I am responsible. God grant us the serenity to accept the things we cannot change. Courage to change the things we can and the wisdom to know the difference.”