RE: Making changes in our decisions
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

Results generated by Tiger Technologies Web hosting using MHonArc.