Re: Chris Kemp's Response to Rules & Regs Violation
From: Sharon Villines (sharonsharonvillines.com)
Date: Sun, 16 Apr 2006 12:21:59 -0700 (PDT)

On Apr 15, 2006, at 5:05 AM, Lion Kuntz wrote:

A proper question is why was the orginal description so distorted? Why
weren't both sides put plainly before the group before asking how to
obtain compulsion of a rule, which on further alanalysis was grossly
misdescribed?

Whoaaaaaaaa Nelly! We have two descriptions. Who decides which one is "correct"?

This is a perfect example of the two opposing viewpoints that govern actions in cohousing every day.

1. We have agreements that were very carefully thought out and agreed to by all members and should be followed until changed. If they are outmoded, they need to be revised.

2. As long as I'm doing what I think is reasonable, the agreements don't apply. Other people don't follow them. They no longer make any sense.

What is important is that communities revisit their agreements regularly and ensure (as much as is possible) that everyone agrees which belief is to prevail. Obviously, in this instance, there is no agreement.

Sharon
---
Sharon Villines
Building Community: A Guide to Creating New Neighborhoods
http://www.buildingcommunity.info


Results generated by Tiger Technologies Web hosting using MHonArc.