Re: qualifying a block as legitimate | <– Date –> <– Thread –> |
From: John Faust (wjfaustgmail.com) | |
Date: Mon, 6 Apr 2009 19:09:40 -0700 (PDT) |
At this site <http://www.consensus.net/>, there is a fairly thorough consensus document (pdf) that can be downloaded. It discusses (briefly on page 18) that a block should be *legitimate* and in accord with the "principles" of the organization. It has always appealed to me as a way around arbitrary or spiteful blocks. My understanding is that the block would have to show that proceeding with the action would in some way violate the principles, vision or mission of the group. That would likely include placing undue burdens on some members. I don't think it is that hard, in most cases, to construct a credible argument for a block given the fuzzy, multifaceted nature of the context most of us operate in. It is when no such argument can be made that the block becomes arbitrary and obstructive. For the serious participant, it isn't a difficult hurdle to clear. If someone isn't that good at constructing arguments, the sympathy of some members of the group would likely help with that task. Honest dialogue includes recognizing the legitimacy of opposing views. John Faust
-
qualifying a block as legitimate Muriel Kranowski, April 6 2009
- Re: qualifying a block as legitimate John Faust, April 6 2009
- Re: qualifying a block as legitimate Rob Sandelin, April 6 2009
- Re: qualifying a block as legitimate Sharon Villines, April 6 2009
-
Re: qualifying a block as legitimate Rod Lambert, April 7 2009
- Re: qualifying a block as legitimate Lyle Scheer, April 7 2009
Results generated by Tiger Technologies Web hosting using MHonArc.