RE: Stand Aside | <– Date –> <– Thread –> |
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.