STANDING ASIDE
From: Jake Morrison (jake.morrisonbbs.synapse.net)
Date: Thu, 16 Mar 95 06:46 CST

Way back in early February, Mike Mariner asked:

 > Jake said:

 > >   Because I didn't feel that the course taken was really dangerous
 > group I was able to just stand aside but I still felt that it would
 > be the wrong (read: disfunctional) course.

 > Was the issue a procedural or human behavior related?  Though I'm not
 > experienced with consensus in a community context, I could see where
 > decisions about behavior as opposed to building something or allocati
 > would have several iterations.  For example, we could decide today th
 > children had to have an adult present to be in a certain area of the
 > house.  Then later, when the children were older and/or more understa
 > dangers, the rule could be lifted.

 > So, I'd feel that standing aside for a human behavior issue would be
 > necessary, because many of today's decisions may need to be adapted,
 > the group experiences the consequences of the decision.

 > Standing aside should seemingly be taken very seriously where a decis
 > involves large costs or that would require lots of time/energy/materi
 > UNDO.  This is theoretical on my part - what's your EXPERIENCE?

   In your terms, the issue was human behavior related.  
   I certainly agree with you that there are some questions that do not 
allow for a second chance while some do (and this was one).
 
   So far we haven't had to make any of the big expensive decisions. 
(Hopefully this spring) Up until a certain point (the point of having 
invested significant money personally) people will be objecting to 
decisions by leaving. A few already have. After that there'll be fewer 
options and we should get better about working things out.

take care
   Jake

---
 * RM 1.3 00940 * RoboMail -- The next generation QWK compatible reader!

Results generated by Tiger Technologies Web hosting using MHonArc.