Re: The Resistance as a Resource Game

Hi James,

> What is the object of the game?

To create, learn, remember, and express ideas about how to 
respond effectively to resistance.  These might be specific ideas 
for responding to specific instances of "resistance," or general 
approaches to responding, or some other categories I haven't 
thought of.

> Is it part of the game to discuss the rules of the game and
> suggest changes to them? In other words, is this thread part
> of the game, or just talking about the game?

I intended this thread to be just talking about the game.  I 
think that if we mix the two, we'll get confused.

> Is resisting changes to the rules of the game part of playing
> it well?

I can't tell.  Maybe we'll find out as the game progresses.

> Is there a "retort" move, where you can respond to responses? 
> Perhaps retorting is a kind of resistance move?

If the retort is resistance, you could play it as a Resistance 
move.  If the retort is, "Hey, that's a marvelous idea," the game 
doesn't have a place for that...  Unless you see the Response 
move as resistance to the original resistance, in which case 
"that's marvelous" is something like a Reason...

I'm getting dizzy.

> Where does "resource" come in? Is that what you mean by
> "reason"?

D'oh!  That's a significant error in the rules.  Thanks for 
pointing it out.  You'd probably make a pretty good tester!

I had meant to add something to the Reason move about using the 
"Resistance" as information about what's going on for the person 
who "resists."

The idea is:  What might the "resistance" say or suggest or allow 
about the person's abilities or expectations or interests?  What 
might it say about the way communication is working or not 
working?  What might it say about the relationship between the 
person promoting the change and the person "resisting" it?  What 
might it say about the context in which all of this is happening? 
  What else might it say that might be useful?

I'll find a way to adjust the rules soon.  In the meantime, 
continue playing.

> What does "effective" mean, when you talk about responding
> effectively? Is an effective response one that makes
> resistance into a resource?

Use any definition that makes sense to you.  At the moment, I'm 
thinking of "effective" as meaning something like "has the 
potential to lead toward resolution of the resistance."

> Aren't there a lot of generic reasons and responses that will 
> get re-used repeatedly? Is there any reason to limit the use 
> of such responses?

I don't know.  Let's see if that becomes a problem.

> This is a bit simplified, but I'm kind of wondering what
> forces would operate to make it any more insightful or useful?
> Is there a system of scoring or critique?

One possibility is that another player might post a variation of 
your move -- say, a slightly different Reason for the same 
"Resistance."  That isn't scoring or critique, exactly, but it 
does allow for comparison.

Feel free to suggest refinements.

> There is a similar game I and Michael Bolton invented. We call
> it "Don't Instead Because". In that game, someone starts by
> saying "you should do X." Players proceed by saying "Don't do
> X, instead you should do Y, because Z."

I like it!

Dale

-- 
Dale Emery, Consultant
Inspiring Leadership for Software People
Web:    http://www.dhemery.com
Weblog: http://www.dhemery.com/cwd

No missed deadlines, only missed opportunities. --Anonymous


------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> 
In low income neighborhoods, 84% do not own computers.
At Network for Good, help bridge the Digital Divide!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/EpW3eD/3MnJAA/cosFAA/X1EolB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~-> 

 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/resistance-as-a-resource/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [email protected]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/