|RE: Revisiting Decisions||<– Date –> <– Thread –>|
|From: Jeanne Goodman (goodmanjjpcohousing.org)|
|Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 14:29:01 -0700 (MST)|
A clarification point here. All members go through a clearness process where they get an opportunity to express concerns about previous decisions. We try to make it clear that we don't want to steamroll the consensus process, but we do want to keep putting the ice pick in a little higher as we climb that mountain of building our community. So instead we try to let people use our decision log as a guide for whether the prospective member feels as though our community is the right community to join. So, for example, let's say Mary is considering becoming a member but absolutely doesn't like our pet policy one bit. The intention isn't to try to get her to try to get up enough support to change the policy, the objective is to be clear and up front with her from the beginning so that if her lifestyle is in conflict with our decisions she'll realize that our community isn't right for her. From the other side of the coin, when Frank joined he also noted our pet policy. He agrees with it and feels really strongly about it. When he became a member, he has the comfort of knowing what the pet policy is and that it is not likely to change. He knows exactly what he's investing in and that becomes a source of comfort. Hope that answers your concern. Jeanne Goodman Jamaica Plain Cohousing Boston, MA http://www.jpcohousing.org -----Original Message----- From: cohousing-l-admin [at] cohousing.org [mailto:cohousing-l-admin [at] cohousing.org]On Behalf Of Sharon Villines Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 1:59 PM To: cohousing-l [at] cohousing.org Subject: Re: [C-L]_Revisiting Decisions > Our group made the following decison about changing decisions: > > 11/19/2000 Changing Decisions 75% of the equity membership would > need to agree before re-visiting a consensed decision. Interesting question -- where does consensus begin and end. If a test of how well your consensus process if working is that decisions stay made until there is new information or changed circumstances, was the decision ever made by consensus if 25% of the group can be ignored if they request to revisit the decision. That sounds like 75% is good enough, leaving 25% unheaded. I realize this is a serious issue. I'm not finding fault with the difficulty of never moving forward, and needed a fall back position if a large majority of the group is in agreement, but should this fall back position also be called "consensus" or referred to in the same terms. Defining 75% is vote counting with majority rule. Sharon -- In Washington DC where all roads lead to Casablanca _______________________________________________ Cohousing-L mailing list Cohousing-L [at] cohousing.org Unsubscribe and other info: http://www.communityforum.net/mailman/listinfo/cohousing-l _______________________________________________ Cohousing-L mailing list Cohousing-L [at] cohousing.org Unsubscribe and other info: http://www.communityforum.net/mailman/listinfo/cohousing-l
- Revisiting Decisions, (continued)
Results generated by Tiger Technologies Web hosting using MHonArc.