Re: principle vs preference / Formal Consensus | <– Date –> <– Thread –> |
From: Racheli Gai (rachelisonoracohousing.com) | |
Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2007 07:00:58 -0700 (PDT) |
Tree wrote (in part):
Butler & Rothstein's Formal Consensus method, as Cinnie mentioned in her message, requires a block to be validated by the full group in order to hold.
This isn't actually accurate. It's true that Butler sees the power to block as belonging to the group (while what an individual does is withholding her/his consent). But the way it get carried out isn't by the whole group agreeing that the block is valid: Rather, the group decides (preferably ahead of time!) how many people it takes to find the withholding of consent as valid, and if
sufficient number does so, then it's a block.The number can be a fixed one, or a certain percentage of the people present at the
meeting.Butler also says that as the number grows, the process becomes more like voting,
and less like consensus.(BTW - I asked him directly about Tree's interpretation, and he says that it wasn't
right). Racheli.
- Objections in Consensus [was: principle vs preference / Formal Consensus, (continued)
-
Objections in Consensus [was: principle vs preference / Formal Consensus Sharon Villines, March 29 2007
- Re: Objections in Consensus [was: principle vs preference / Formal Consensus Rosemary Gould, March 29 2007
- Re: Objections in Consensus [was: principle vs preference / Formal Consensus Sharon Villines, March 29 2007
- Re: Objections in Consensus [was: principle vs preference / Formal Consensus Sharon Villines, April 6 2007
-
Objections in Consensus [was: principle vs preference / Formal Consensus Sharon Villines, March 29 2007
- Re: principle vs preference / Formal Consensus Racheli Gai, March 29 2007
- Formal Consensus Maggie Dutton, March 29 2007
- Re: Formal Consensus Brian Bartholomew, March 29 2007
- Re: Formal Consensus Buzz Harris, March 29 2007
- Formal Consensus Maggie Dutton, March 29 2007
Results generated by Tiger Technologies Web hosting using MHonArc.