Consensus, Majority Vote, "Blocks"
From: Fred H Olson (fholsoncohousing.org)
Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2011 06:07:46 -0700 (PDT)
Rebecca Reid <rreid [at] cohousing.com>
is the author of the message below.  It was posted by
Fred, the Cohousing-L list manager <fholson [at] cohousing.org>
after deleting excess quoting of digest.
--------------------  FORWARDED MESSAGE FOLLOWS --------------------
>> ok, the big list of synonyms:
>
>> willingness to compromise

At Pioneer Valley there is no such thing as a "block"--that is, no one
person can unilaterally veto something. Since everyone contributes something
essential to the discussion, even what seems like an unreasonable objection
has some piece of truth in it.  If there is a person who has a serious
objection to a proposal, it means we haven't finished yet.  If the person
with the objection manages to convince the rest that their objection is
truly for the sake of the good of the whole, It is wise to consider it and
see if changes to the proposal can fix it.  If the person remains convinced
even after being heard and having the proposal altered that the proposal is
detrimental to the community, but no one else agrees, the proposal can go
forward and they step aside. At least they get a good 'I told you so" if
they turn out to have been right!
In the beginning, 17 years ago, before we knew what we know now, we used to
have blocking (then called "red carding"--anyone still use the card system?)
and ended up with a "tyranny of the minority", or "veto power".  It was
clear that this didn't work, so we worked on it a lot.  We've gotten much
better at listening to each other and including other people's views since
then.  There's a lot less "head butting" now.
Rebecca
Pioneer Valley

On Oct 2, 2011, at 8:27 AM, R Philip Dowds wrote:

>
> I agree that "blocking" (paramount objection) is mis-used and
> misunderstood under many circumstances.  And that tightening the
> rules of objection can help many groups do their work.
>
> However, your particular formulation strikes me as having a fatal
> flaw:  After I explain, in articulate detail, why Proposal X is
> contrary to our vision and mission documents, and will have ill
> consequences for our community ? but find I am alone in these views,
> and my community begs to differ ? then what?  Should I go ahead and
> block in the belief that I know what's better for the community than
> the community itself knows?  Or, should I abandon my principles and
> firmly held convictions, and just get along?
>
> R Philip Dowds AIA
> Cornerstone Cohousing
> 175 Harvey Street, Unit 5
> Cambridge, MA 02140
> 617.354.6094
>
> On Oct 1, 2011, at 12:15 PM, drmaryann99 [at] mac.com wrote:
>
>> At the same time we tightened up the requirements of a legitimate
>> block. You must frame your block in terms of the community's vision/
>> mission or by able to say how proceeding would harm the community.
>> This eliminated blocks because someone didn't 'like' the proposal.

Results generated by Tiger Technologies Web hosting using MHonArc.