Re: A Glimps of Cohousing in 2060
From: Sharon Villines (sharonsharonvillines.com)
Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2015 07:38:04 -0800 (PST)
On Jan 8, 2015, at 10:03 AM, Mabel Liang <mabel [at] twomeeps.com> wrote:

> This makes no sense. We have people here at Cornerstone who keep on worrying 
> about people blocking. We consensed a new decision-making process back in 
> October of 2013, over a year ago, which got rid of blocking.

My understanding was that the 75% majority vote was instituted because of 
repeated failures to be able to reach consent for what ever reason. The "for 
others" meant for others on the list who weren't familiar with the issue being 
discussed.

I didn't talk to everyone, certainly, it isn't an issue of who is/was "right". 
The reality is that if a group doesn't have a common aim the expectation of 
reaching consensus on an action is unrealistic. If my goal is to burn down the 
building and yours is to renovate it, its unlikely that we will reach 
consensus. We might be able to work out a win-win solution but only if both 
parties are willing to do that. Not all are. Some people just want to vote no 
and go home --even if they are in the minority. Sometimes they need to be able 
to do that. Who says they shouldn't be able to do that as long as they dont' 
carry a grudge that affects the community for months and years?

Even when a majority back up vote provision exists, many people don't want to 
use it. It feels like failure.  So they still want to resolve objectioins, even 
when the objector doesn't want to.

There is only magic in consensus decision-making if everyone buys into the 
magic.

Sharon
----
Sharon Villines, Washington DC
"Exhaustion is not about being tired, but about being disheartened." Jerry 
Koch-Gonzales



Results generated by Tiger Technologies Web hosting using MHonArc.