Re: Consensus, Majority Vote, "Blocks" | <– Date –> <– Thread –> |
From: R.N. Johnson (cohorandayahoo.com) | |
Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2011 13:47:00 -0700 (PDT) |
We have a voting fallback in place, which is intended to allow the community to move forward if the issue is important enough. When we first moved in some worried that this would quickly disintegrate into majority rule. In practice it has served as an encouragement to block carefully; too many blocks from the same person and community members, normally hesitant to move ahead when there are objections, are willing to move to a vote. Most of the time, we keep talking. Sometimes we change the proposal, or the person decides to stand aside because their objection does not rise to the level of a real threat to the community and it is something they can "live with", sometimes we shelve the proposal. I think it would have been "cleaner" from a consensus point of view, to adopt a lifetime cap on blocks. The effect is similar, but instead of the community "overriding" the dissenter, the frequent dissenter chooses to use up their lifetime supply of blocks Randa Johnson New Brighton Cohousing Aptos, CA
- Quorum Requirements, (continued)
- Quorum Requirements Sharon Villines, September 26 2011
-
Consensus, Majority Vote, "Blocks" Fred H Olson, October 3 2011
-
Re: Consensus, Majority Vote, "Blocks" Michael Barrett, October 3 2011
- Re: Consensus, Majority Vote, "Blocks" Sharon Villines, October 3 2011
-
Re: Consensus, Majority Vote, "Blocks" Michael Barrett, October 3 2011
- Re: Consensus, Majority Vote, "Blocks" R.N. Johnson, October 5 2011
-
Re: Consensus, Majority Vote, "Blocks" Sharon Villines, October 5 2011
- Re: Consensus, Majority Vote, "Blocks" Moz, October 5 2011
- Re: Consensus, Majority Vote, "Blocks" Racheli Gai, October 18 2011
- Re: Consensus, Majority Vote, "Blocks" Moz, October 18 2011
Results generated by Tiger Technologies Web hosting using MHonArc.