Re: Rules (was Play/toy weapons)
From: Tom Smyth (
Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2016 13:01:30 -0700 (PDT)
One idea is to make non-compliance as visible as possible, if it's not
already. Obviously you need to be discreet. Sending out a blaming email
won't help. But if, eg, you have a shared document that lists all the
people that *do *comply (e.g. have done their work hours, have paid their
MAFs, etc.), then non-compliance will be obvious. This won't work for every
policy though...

On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 2:29 PM, Muriel Kranowski <murielk [at]> wrote:

> The dilemma for us, still unresolved, is not so much "what rules do we
> want?" but "what to do about non-compliance?"
> I think our policies are reasonable. Most of them evolved in the course of
> community life as a problem or issue became apparent, was discussed, and it
> was finally agreed to create a relevant policy.
> But we have always had a small number of residents who apparently don't
> think rules or policies apply to them, and (except for paying dues) we
> don't know what to do about it. Not everyone thinks that there should be a
> penalty for non-compliance - they think people comply to maintain their
> social capital and that's good enough. Those who think there should be some
> kind of consequence don't know what might be effective and would be
> accepted.
> How does that play out elsewhere in coho-land?
>    Muriel
>    (not sure I want to out my community here!)
> _________________________________________________________________
> Cohousing-L mailing list -- Unsubscribe, archives and other info at:

Tom Smyth

Worker-Owner, Sassafras Tech Collective
Specializing in innovative, usable tech for social change *·* @sassafrastech

Resident, Touchstone Cohousing

Results generated by Tiger Technologies Web hosting using MHonArc.