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

[Brian Bartholomew (bb]

Way back on 28 Mar 2002, Rob Sandelin wrote*:

> There is also a very important function of having a backup. It makes
> people more cooperative. If I know that I can't stop the group just
> by blocking consensus, and that they will outvote me at a future
> meeting, then even the most uncooperative person is likely to make
> some moves towards compromise, because they know they will simply
> get outvoted a couple meetings down the road.

Tree repeated a shorter statement of the same idea in a Feb 2007
Cohousing magazine article on inappropriate blocks.

To me, this sounds like 'majority rule with brainstorming'.  The sword
of voting is hanging over everyone's heads all of the time.  How many
objections are unvoiced, which consent is not gained, because
minorities figure it's not even worth a try?  Abilene paradox?

I will make a wild and crazy prediction: Remove the possibility of
voting as far as you can; try to make it impossible to initiate from
inside.  Perhaps you'll do it only if a bank or a court requires it.
Otherwise, blocks stand until somebody changes their mind.  Perhaps
after an initial burst, there are no ongoing rounds of meetings to
wear people down.  Then allow any decision to be revisited.  I predict
there will be substantial, surprising changes in your group decisions.

Are you still sure you haven't voted?

                                                        Brian


* http://lists.cohousing.org/archives/cohousing-l/msg15352.html