Aa history Lovers 2006 moderators Nancy Olson and Glenn F. Chesnut page

(hartsell at etex.net)
Qualifying: What makes us qualified to speak

in the meeting of recovered (ing) Alcoholics.

dates are given at the beginning of any talk at

an A.A. gathering. Of course this announcement of

sobriety dates is also an affirmation for the person

stating it.
"Our stories disclose in a general way what we

were like [identifying ourselves as real alcoholics]

what happened [how we came to the 12 Step Program

of A.A.] and what we are like now [the results of

applying what we have learned from AA]."
My understanding of the term's usage.
Sherry C.H.
- - -
WEST TEXAS

From: Tom White

(tomwhite at cableone.net)
I seem to remember the use of qualifying and

qualification from NYC in the 1960s and have heard

it occasionally more recently in West Texas,

where I now live. So I think it is an old and

acceptable AA term, although I am not at all sure

how widespread its use is.

From: "Carole Seddon"

(seddoca at jhmi.edu)
The way I have heard it in Baltimore meetings is

as follows. The speaker may talk a bit generally

and then say I need to qualify -- what it was

like, what happened, and how it is now.

glennccc@sbcglobal.net

(glennccc at sbcglobal.net)
In the cities and towns of the St. Joe river valley

region in northcentral Indiana, we almost never

hear the term "qualifying." We usually call it

"giving a lead" when someone tells his or her

story at a meeting.
We have many more discussion meetings than we do

speaker meetings, and in modern times usually

have only a single speaker, who speaks for 45 to

50 minutes.

the U.S. and Canada, and in fact all over the

world. We need to get out of the mindset

which we sometimes see nowadays, that everyone

has to use the same words and do everything

the same way. This program is about developing

spirituality; it is not a new religion with

"sacred rituals" which have to be performed

with all the right ritual words and ritual

gestures in order to be "valid" and communicate

the spirit.
Sgt. Bill S. talks about the general custom of

having three speakers, who spoke for ten or

fifteen minutes each, on Long Island (in the

greater New York City area) back in the 1940's,

so the three-speaker meeting was a very old

custom.
In northcentral Indiana, people are often

criticized by the old timers when they give

long leads, talking only about their bad

experiences while still drinking, while

explaining nothing about the positive things

they learned after coming into the fellowship,

and how they learned these things. The old

timers will quietly say, "that is a drunk-a-logue,

not a real lead."

say "let me qualify first" and tell a few

outrageous drinking stories, before they

begin talking about how their sponsors and the

good old timers in the meetings taught them

lessons about how to live a better kind of life,

and their struggles with some of the harder

things they had to deal with after getting sober

(death of a close family member, going back to

school for further education and building a

new career, being in the hospital with something

very bad wrong, etc.) in order to explain how

they learned to use the program to get through

even the really bad things.

("at" vs. "for")

From: Charlene C. . . . . . . . . . . . . 12/3/2006 6:04:00 PM
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
Um, I don't have a fourth edition Big Book. Is

that where this word "transcendence" is, in the

third step prayer?
c.cook

austin, tx

(cometkazie1 at cox.net)

The editors tell us some changes are made "in

the interest of clarity." They changed victory

in the 3rd Step Prayer to transcendence, but

that doesn't seem to me to add clarity.

Tommy
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
++++Message 3915. . . . . . . . . . . . Re: Circle and Triangle lawsuit

From: Gary Becktell . . . . . . . . . . . . 12/3/2006 4:57:00 PM

IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
Gary Becktell and Sherry Hartsell: there was

no conference decision.

- - -
From: "Gary Becktell"

(gk at kitcarson.net)

No, Jenny, it was not a Conference decision.

It occurred right after the Conference and was

a decision based on the recommendation of 'legal

counsel.' Since the 'logo' (circle triangle) could

not be defended as the 'legal' property of AAWS,

it was decided that it needed to be dropped

altogether.
G
- - -
Original message No. 3910 from: "jenny andrews"

(jennylaurie1 at hotmail.com)

Surely "NY" (i.e. presumably GSO) had no power

to abitrarily drop the circle and triangle symbol

from all our literature etc - surely that would

have been a Conference decision?

Laurie A.
- - -
From: "Sherry C. Hartsell"

Download 13.83 Mb.

Share with your friends: