Baby Blue

South Florida Literature Committee Chair account – page 215

Bob Stone – page 220

An Open letter to the trustees concerning the printing of the 3rd Edition, revised Basic Text – page 221

Intent was to get attention on negative factions within world services by agitating

At Fellowship conventions and passing our copies of home made Basic Text

Cease and desist letters from WSO to members – page 223

Commentary on history leading up to Baby Blue Case – page 225

Florida member response to C&D letter – page 227 Tremendous Amount of Pain

Grover N. shares receiving a Cease and Desist letter – page 228

Grateful Dave's Fight – page 229

Grateful Dave’s Home Group – page 229

WSO takes bait and goes to court in Philadelphia to sue Grateful Dave

exerpts from the Baby Blue Court Case

– page 230

Birth of the Free Basic Text – page 270

Transcript of the court case - Summary Ruling by Judge Pollack

Civil Action No. 90-7631 – page 273

WS Inventory – page 276

South Florida Blue Story

I had the unfortunate luck of being the area literature chair [of and area in South Florida] when the 4th Edition fiasco occurred in '88. It seems that the World Lit Committee (WLC), at either the 85 or 86 WSC (can't remember for sure), put in a motion asking for permission to perform a "LIGHT EDIT" (their words, my emphasis) of the Basic Text, to correct problems of inconsistency of grammar, tense, gender, number, etc. (e.g., sentences that began in the past tense and ended in the present tense.) Obviously, nobody had a problem with that. Unfortunately, they couldn't leave it at that.

When the 4th Edition came out, there were people actually in tears, saying, "They've gutted our book!" In a classic example of "exceeding one's mandate," the WLC had changed a lot more than grammar and tense. They had rewritten whole passages, altered the meaning of many phrases, and worst of all, totally deleted many phrases, sentences and even paragraphs.

My friends were adamant that, as lit chair, I hold a workshop. So, I sat down with both books for a couple of days and detailed the alterations. Indeed, I found out that my friends had not exaggerated; there was no rational way that a literate person could describe the changes as merely "grammatical." I typed up my findings into a report.

At the workshop, members of the "royal family" (addicts who belonged to the sponsorship tree that has often exerted a dominant role at the WSC) came to try to shout us down and call us trouble-makers. When that didn't work, they pretty much said we were lying. Their position was that there had been no substantive changes of the Basic Text, and that we were just spreading division and distrust in the fellowship. (This was not the first or last time that the "NA Gurus" stuck their feet in their mouths, embarrassed themselves, and ended up being mad at me for bringing the meeting back to order and standing on principle.)

We carefully laid out the history of the 4th edition, the details of the changes, and the furor that was already taking place across the fellowship by mail and phone. (One of the least pleasant stories circulating was that the changes were made to appease Comp-Care and Hazelden, who were then distributing more Basic Texts than the Fellowship itself; they wanted the changes to make the book less "raw & street-wise," and more literary. Many addicts said that less rawness reduced its realness.)

Once we held up the books and showed the changes, they could no longer claim that there were no substantive changes. So instead they admitted, yes there were changes, but they were GOOD changes! We said, one's opinion about the changes is not the point; the point is that the fellowship was lied to and the WLC exceeded its mandate in a spectacular example of self-will run riot.

The 4th edition split the fellowship that year; the 5th edition came out as a compromise which satisfied nobody, because while it restored the out-and-out deletions, it did not change back the alterations of text.

Some addicts continued to object, and tried to bring motions through their groups, areas and regions that would stop publication of the 5th Edition, would restore the publication of the 3rd Ed. revised (which was, after all, the last edition that had actually gone out to the groups in a group-conscience process), and would put in place a standing rule that changes in the NA literature would not be possible in the future without strict adherence to consulting the group conscience. These motions were defeated, not by a strict democratic process, but by parliamentary maneuvers and being declared out of order.

So as you can see, many members -- including many of the most idealistic members, and including many of the people who had helped write the book felt disaffected, felt that their input was not merely not being considered but rather was being actively discouraged. Naturally, they objected. Ironically, those who spoke out to this steam rolling full-speed-ahead rejection of the voices of caution, were suddenly being called "rebels," "trouble-makers," and "self-willed addicts in denial."

Again proving that the disease has been to so many meetings with us that it can use the language of recovery against us. (In another age, a teacher pointed out that "The devil can quote scripture, and twist it to his purpose." Similar concept.)

Despite being a voice of moderation, caution and co-operation, I was painted with this same broad brush locally by those with strong loyalties to the WLC. I was being called a "dangerous addict!" Me, a chubby, non-violent, vegetarian, gentle jokester! I had never said a word publicly against any person, I had just called for the WLC and WSC to listen to the objections of the members and find a path of mutual understanding consistent with our principles and the group conscience. But that fell short of total loyalty and acquiescence, so now I was being attacked and even slandered. Fortunately it didn't work. The newcomers and GSR's already knew me to be a helpful and honest person, and calling me names just bounced egg back on the faces of the NA gurus. Which of course only made them madder.

It was during this time that I made the acquaintance of a member known as "Grateful Dave." He was sick with HIV and felt he had little to lose by being brave. He was one of the members who began printing the Baby Blues, and he was pretty up-front about it; but when he explained his purpose he was not alone for long. A number of areas, and even a region or two, bought the books and supported Dave's efforts. I neither jumped on Dave's bandwagon nor opposed him, but I did admire his guts, and understood that he was not merely motivated by self-will.

Dave said that proceeds from the sales of the BT were being used to build a bureaucracy at the WSO; that because of the high cost of that office they needed more saleable "product," but that the old group-conscience process that had created the BT was "too slow;" that those members who had been the creative forces that made the Text possible, were now consistently pushed aside -- no longer welcome in world lit. because they had the annoying habit of standing on principle and demanding accountability; and because NA's best writers were discouraged and shunted aside in this manner, all the writing projects being developed by WLC were mediocre at best, and would continue to be rejected by the fellowship.

One had only to look at the utter failure of the "professional writer" project on It Works, which wasted over $80,000 of the fellowship's money, to see that Dave was not far off the mark. Dave believed that what the WSC and WLC needed was a wake-up call. They had gotten too caught up in money, and too out of touch with grass-roots addicts who raised the money and wrote the literature. While the BT was written by any addicts who wanted to participate, without regard to "official position" or even clean-time, the WLC was now becoming so restrictive in who could participate that even bona-fide regional lit committees were being told, "Don't call us, we won't call you."

They couldn't see that encouraging the creative urges of the fellowship would create MORE literature; they could only see that literature not created by the WLC would become harder and harder to control. Legalities had superceded principles. His sources on the WLC and WSB (trustees) told him he was right on.

Dave said that the whole problem with the set-up was that we had failed to follow AA's model. (Dave, by the way, was no ‘anda'; but he would not argue with a successful model.) In AA, literature did not fund world services. Donations by the groups (and incidentally legacies and bestowals left by richer members before AA had the Traditions) were the primary source of revenue for AA's services and offices. AA's literature prices had consistently and deliberately stayed low; furthermore, AA was not terrified by the prospect of electronic distribution of the Big Book and other AA lit., because the wider the distribution the greater chance that would bring in new members -- hence guaranteeing a continued fund flow through the best source, Self-Support! (7th Tradition)

In NA, the WSO had grown explosively BECAUSE of the Basic Text! When revenues began to falter, officials began to react with fear because it might mean the loss of some jobs. The 4th-edition effort to "tone down" the book to "sell more product" to treatment centers and distributors had backfired, which now had the prospect of wrecking WSO and WLC's long-range funding plans -- a major new writing project every 5 years. It was essential that the credibility and loyalty of the objectors be called into question, and the attention of the fellowship drawn away from the major blunder that had been caused by ignoring group conscience.

Dave was determined to prove that the emperor had no clothes. The Baby Blue was designed to prove that the BT could be published dirt cheap, and given free to any newcomer who needed it. Dozens of groups around the fellowship ( but especially in the eastern US) bought thousands of copies, and gave them away free -- asking only for a "donation suggested" if possible. It said on the cover, "Fellowship Approved" -- which was not untrue per se, because in fact the 3rd Edition revised was the last version of the book that HAD been approved by the fellowship at large! (Though, certainly, the Baby Blue was never CONFERENCE approved. Nor did it say it was.) While previous versions of the BT, from gray review & input to the 3rd revised, had gone out to the groups, the 4th and 5th had never gone out to the groups. Dave had convinced quite a few thousand addicts that the Baby Blues were more authentic expressions of the group-conscience process than the official version was!

Of course, this was a challenge to be sued. Dave was awaiting the prospect with relish; he had done his homework.

Grateful Dave wanted a test case, to challenge the WSO's claim to owning the copyrights to NA literature. He did not hide his role in the Baby Blue affair, he flaunted it. And in short order, he was awarded: with a lawsuit. He was ordered to appear in Federal Court in Philadelphia to defend his actions, and he was ready. WSO sent its assistant director and an expensive lawyer. Dave sent Dave. He represented himself. WSO told the judge that the Basic Text had been a work-for-hire, and that Dave had infringed on the copyright.

Dave disagreed. And he had a witness, a man who could rightfully be called "Mr. Basic Text" himself. Bo S. of PA came to testify on Dave's behalf. Bo had been the first world lit. chair. He had started the process that led to the Basic Text. He had shepherded the whole process through to its conclusion, even though many had told him it couldn't (and even shouldn't) be done. Bo was a recovery hero to many addicts. Bo told the judge that the BT had never been a work-for-hire; that in fact the then-officers of the WSO had strongly objected to a book not produced within the WSO.

Bo told the judge in detail the story that is briefly outlined in the Basic Text. (In the 3rd edition it is called the foreword; in the 5th addition it's called the preface.) He described how hundreds of people contributed thousands of man-hours to create a "synthesis of the collective group conscience of the Fellowship as a whole...". A few other members who had also "been there" to witness the creation and birth of the Basic Text, also spoke to corroborate Bo's description.

Dave and his witnesses also described how the rights to the book had been given to the fellowship in trust, and that the WSO could be described as the trustee but in no way the "owner" of the book; and that in any case it was never foreseen that the WSO would protect the book from use by its members, just against copyright infringement from outsiders. From all descriptions, the judge seemed unusually hip to the unique concept of a "Spiritual Fellowship" as opposed to a corporate business. For once the meek did inherit; he dropped a bombshell on the court by announcing to the representative of the WSO that he was ready to find against WSO and in favor of Dave. However, he was offering him a chance to come to some mutually agreeable compromise with Dave, if Dave was willing to be magnanimous -- and that he STRONGLY suggested that WSO get humble and ask!

It seems that in a flash, the tables were turned. Dave had every right to gloat, but he didn't. In fact, he was actually invited out to Van Nuys and spent some time at the Office with that official, hammering out the agreements. It appeared in the CAR.

Dave agreed to stop publishing the BBs, and WSO agreed to hold a fellowship-wide referendum on the BT. Both sides were duty-bound to stop all finger-pointing and name-calling. The judge was satisfied. And most of this story was never broadcast to the fellowship, "in the interests of unity."

Unfortunately, the referendum was kicked out at the next WSC. Too expensive, too time-consuming, too blah-blah-blah. Dave grew much sicker, and died before he could pursue the matter further. Most of the impetus for exposing the naked emperor died with him. And the name-calling crept back.

You may have heard of the much-vaunted "4th Step" of WSC and WSO in the past three years. This largely grew out of the above problems. Yet the results of that inventory are still much in doubt. Corporate mentality still seems to rule at the world level. The only reason It Works came out at all is because the window was reopened for a short while on group-conscienced literature to let it happen.

But people like Bo are not being asked to come back and restore the process. Rather, an atmosphere of distrust and polarization has still remained regarding all this stuff; I see no immediate solution, as both sides are absolutely convinced that they are right.

A few years ago, Bo S. and a few trusted friends decided that it was time for a new group-conscience process, to be called "the NA Way of Life." It was meant to be a broad view of the culture of recovery that develops in the lives of members as they spend many years living clean. He composed an outline, and did some writing himself; but then he turned to the workshop process. Getting "just folks," regular members, to participate in the work, he held various workshops around the country to encourage the same spark of contribution and collective creation that had led to the BT.

People who have participated in these workshops describe it as a wonderful opportunity to share the miracle that has transformed their lives. They also are amazed to see the group-conscience process in action; it works.

In the mood of distrust that has gone on ever since Jimmy K was locked out of the WSO, it is hard for some members to believe that some people serve in an independent role, not because that would be their first preference but because that is the only way they can serve. Bo S. is not trying to lead a coup, and I am confident that neither was Dave. They were trying to light a spark, and Frankenstein's monster could only respond, "Fire bad."

Despite the fact that my moderateness has been a matter of impatience to those more partisan than I, the very fact that I can view the contributions of people like Dave and Bo, not with anger and outrage but with appreciation and understanding, makes me "unreliable" and "potentially disloyal" in the view of those who support the party line. Despite good shares at good conventions, (again one of those "independent roles" I was mentioning,) and 10 years of writing pretty good recovery articles and ideas, I consider the chance of my being considered as a WCNA speaker or WLC member as so close to nil, it would stun me for a week if I got an offer.

The party line, that all the above were merely stunts pulled by malcontents, thrives when people only know one side of the story. I do not liken the division, as one member did, to the political division between conservatives and liberals; there are lots of liberals who are very grass-roots, and lots of conservatives who can't wait for government to get into your bedroom and tell you what to do. I think the problem is the "heady rush of power." Those at the center can be intoxicated by their position, and many say that's why they sought it. Just like "it takes one to know one," so those in power are apt to believe the motives of those who oppose them are all about power. It's hard for them to believe that it's about principle. And when it gets polarized enough, each side demonizes the other, and it's hard for both the ins and the outs to even believe that their opponents HAVE any principles.

I am sure that all members want the best for NA, and that no-one wants to "tear NA apart." I fear that addicts on all sides of disputes fail to thoroughly consider the thoughts and the legitimate grievances of those who disagree, and in the process create enmity and division needlessly.

But our problems are not going to go away until we really LISTEN to each other, instead of jumping to conclusions and calling each other names. The fact that even highly informed and experienced members can view some of our most valuable and creative members as distant stick figures wearing "kick-me" signs, shows that we still are quick to believe the worst about each other, rather than seeking to know the facts. I don't believe that this is really the Evil Empire vs. the Rebel Alliance, or its reverse. But if we don't back up and show love & respect, it could get a lot worse.

Love and Blessings,

DH in South Fla.

“Dave was invited out to Van Nuys and spent some time at the Office with that official, hammering out the agreements. It appeared in the CAR.” We need to find any documents or CAR reports relating to these agreements. Did the WSO carry out court order, or not? Is WSO in default, yes/no? Something happened at WSC that next year where WSO was not going to do something called for by court order, and got 11^th hour call from Judge Pollack and WSO backed off. Can’t recall details. - Ed