RE: Stand Aside
From: Rob Sandelin (robsanmicrosoft.com)
Date: Sat, 19 Aug 1995 20:58:24 -0500
 In Mac's example of standing aside on a purchase of a rototiller, 
indeed, in the way I understand standing aside, a person who stood 
aside from this decision  would not be asked to participate 
financially.  This is not really a problem, the cost per share merely 
goes up slightly to cover the difference.

Standing aside, in my understanding, covers when a group decision does 
not meet the needs of an individual, but can still meet the needs of 
the group.  To use Mac's example, I might personally strongly believe 
that rototillers are  very bad machines, they damage the soil, use 
fossil fuels, etc and would never do anything in my own garden other 
than hand till.  I therefore do not want to buy into a rototiller and 
will never use it.  I understand that I might be the only one to feel 
this way, and I can live with others buying a rototiller because I feel 
they will learn over time, what I know about what rototillers do to the 
tilth of the soil and I also see that everyone else has heard my 
opinion and hold other values.  So I stand aside.  So in this example, 
I do not chip in my share of the cost and I never use the machine.  
Fair enough.

If several people stand aside from a decision, then that decision 
should probably be rethought out.  But if one or two stand aside, and 
are comfortable standing aside, then they should be excused.

Obviously there are places where standing aside would undermine the 
Integrity of the group, such as payment of group assessments.  In this 
case, standing aside could not be an option and other means of making 
the decision would have to be used.

Standing aside is often used when your personal values conflict with a 
group goal and the values of others.  For example, if my personal 
values are that killing animals is wrong, then I will speak up about 
eating the community chickens and express that value.  It would be 
inappropriate to block a community decision based on my own values 
unless I felt that it would somehow damage the community to allow them 
to make the decision.  This is the gray area where most people do NOT 
understand the difference between blocking and standing aside.  If 
others in the community feel it is OK to eat the community chickens, 
and listen and respect my feelings, but disagree, then I have no right 
to block the decision to eat the chickens, no matter what my personal 
values make me feel.  I then stand aside, and am never asked to 
participate in killing or eating the chickens.  And of course, if I 
have Integrity with my values, I never would anyway.

In my limited experience with consensus, blocking is only appropriate if
1) I do not think the group has enough , or the right information to 
make a decision or 2) If I strongly believe that going ahead with the 
decision will hurt the group. Too often people using blocking as a way 
to force everyone to accept their values and this is, IMHO, a misuse of 
consensus process.

All other situations in which I am in conflict with a decision due to 
values or how it will affect me, require a stand aside.

Rob Sandelin
Sharingwood


  • Stand Aside Mac Thomson, August 11 1995
    • RE: Stand Aside Rob Sandelin, August 19 1995
    • RE: Stand Aside Pablo Halpern, August 21 1995

Results generated by Tiger Technologies Web hosting using MHonArc.