Cohousing-L Mailing List: Re: Formal Consensus vs Sociocracy

[Racheli Gai (racheli]

I very much agree with Tree that deciding IN THE MOMENT about a block
(without a rule/guideline to go by) is not a good idea.
All too often, at a time when someone withholds consent, there is lots 
of tension
and even polarization.  This isn't a good time to create rules, but 
rather to fall
on pre-determined ones (which were pondered, discussed and consensed on
previously).

Racheli.

On Apr 5, 2007, at 8:31 PM, Tree Bressen wrote:

> >  I think Tree's implementation is more
> > flexible and respectful, as it requires a serious discussion of a 
> > block and
> > a decision IN THE MOMENT how to deal with the block, made by those 
> > who are
> > not blocking, and the method of deciding depends on the situation.  
> > Having
> > decided ahead of time how many blocks are necessary for a full block 
> > to me
> > is more like voting, and doesn't promote understanding.  But it is 
> > very true
> > that having the option of evaluating a block does preclude it from 
> > happening
> > in most cases, and I have to say I think that's a good thing.
>
> While i am of course pleased to be seen in a flattering light, i 
> actually
> do advocate having clarity in advance about what happens if there is 
> debate
> about the validity of a block.  (So perhaps i was misinterpreted and am
> less flexible than you were thinking! ;-)  I think it's too much 
> pressure
> to figure it out in the moment.
>
> I am open-minded as to what the rule should be.  I think a group can
> successfully operate with the facilitator deciding (as in the 
> Quakers), the
> steering committee deciding (as Annie Russell suggests), or having a # 
> or %
> approval (as i now understand CT Butler to propose).