|RE: Making changes in our decisions||<– Date –> <– Thread –>|
|From: sbraun (sbraungmavt.net)|
|Date: Tue, 13 May 2003 11:10:04 -0600 (MDT)|
I think Sharon hits the nail on the head, and perhaps explains why we don't feel like we are wallowing in mud. If a member wants to re-open a decision they have to bring a proposal, and the proposal has to include a rationale--a reason--for the change in whatever policy. Sometimes people have begun to work on proposals and haven't been able to come up with any reasons that haven't been discussed already (and reported in the minutes, which is a really important part of this). Then they usually drop it. Coming up with a "reason" seems to be a good process of self education. Sheila Braun Champlain Valley Cohousing Charlotte, Vermont (802) 425-5030 > > >On 5/13/2003 11:27 AM, "Casey Morrigan" <cjmorr [at] pacbell.net> wrote: > >> the group was exhausting itself in revisiting decisions over >> and over, or having one absent member re-raise an issue cuz they weren't >at >> the meeting where it was made. I was reading Sharon's post about >> sociocracy, and her thoughts that revisiting a decision doesn't hurt. I >was >> remembering my felt experience about revisiting decisions all the time. >It >> was like wallowing in mud! It was so difficult. > >I wasn't suggesting that it didn't hurt to be constantly revisiting >decisions -- certainly this is draining and unproductive. What I was saying >is that length of time or number of members aren't productive criteria on >which to base decisions to reopen decisions. They will not produce or >ensure >the best interests of your community. > >The argument is the basis on which decisions should reopened. To reopen a >decision there should be changed circumstances or new information. There >should be a reason for reopening the decision -- a new member is not one of >them unless the new member results in changing the criteria on which the >original decision was made. > >I was part of a group that required 4 people to reopen but many people will >support anyone who wants to discuss any issue. It was easy to get support >for reopening any decision on no basis at all. > >But requiring that there be a reason for reopening -- that new information >is available or that circumstances are changed -- is a condition that >ensures that decisions can be reconsidered when necessary and appropriate. >Further, this encourages groups and individuals to focus on criteria and >reasoning so it is clear whether there are changed circumstances or new >information. > >(Cohousing Truth #509,798: The ability of a group to forget not only why >they made a decision but that they ever made it all is unlimited.) > >Sharon >-- >Sharon Villines, Washington DC >Where all roads lead to Casablanca > > > >_______________________________________________ >Cohousing-L mailing list >Cohousing-L [at] cohousing.org Unsubscribe and other info: >http://www.cohousing.org/cohousing-L _______________________________________________ Cohousing-L mailing list Cohousing-L [at] cohousing.org Unsubscribe and other info: http://www.cohousing.org/cohousing-L
- Re: Making changes in our decisions, (continued)
- RE: Making changes in our decisions Casey Morrigan, May 13 2003
- RE: Making changes in our decisions Rob Sandelin, May 13 2003
Results generated by Tiger Technologies Web hosting using MHonArc.