I'm having some difficulty determining exactly the extent of Facilitator authority during meetings. As Facilitator I am experiencing some circle members who interrupt to offer their opinion without direct invitation.
At times I believe this comes about because of a tendency from our circle members to bring vague Tensions and to ask for open advice, and then the group falls into a habit where we begin dialogue or a strategic nature.
How to allow the organic process but not allow diversion into theorizing?
Additionally, at what point does forceful, repeated interruption by a circle member become so problematic that the structure is entirely broken? Today I was interrupted so forcefully that I felt emotionally charged and I believe others did also.
The scenario -
Circle member brought tension 'Rep Link', explaining that their subcircle was preparing to begin functioning within Holacracy and that an election would soon be needed to elect a Rep Link. Member asked whether they had the authority to appoint a circle member in that sub-circle, and then *asked for advice from anyone present*.
I began to offer said advice with 'as I fill the role of Holacracy Study Coordinator I have input for you that you a lead link of a circle has the authority...' - at which point the forcible interruption occurred, and continued, and asked for intervention by @Secretary, who interrupted to 'allow' the interruption.
Frankly I do not even recall the content of what that other member then shared, but when they were finished speaking, I asked the original tension-bringing member if their tension had been met.
That individual said no, but that they would engage me offline (1-on-1) to get the information.
So, what happened there? How and when does a Facilitator allow such an entry, and if is to NOT be allowed, how to stop it without literally screaming?