Cohousing-L Mailing List: Re: process for developing values statement

[Sharon Villines (sharon]

Some wordsmithing suggestions. Words often produce the opposite of their 
intended effect.

> ACCOUNTABILITY:  When a member takes responsibility in a circle for a task 
> with a specific date for
> completion or commits to a share of work in the community, that commitment is 
> expected to be done on time.
> When it is not possible to finish on time, the member makes provisions for 
> backup and/or suggests a new date
> for completion and communicates with affected parties.

The emphasis on the circle gets dropped in the second sentence. The person 
should return to the circle to discuss problems and alternatives. The person 
isn’t left out there to resolve everything themselves.

> DIVERSITY: Members listen to differences of opinion and value the open 
> exchange of ideas. We listen
> respectfully, questioning the status quo when needed.

This is mentioned later but would be good here: Understand that importance is 
placed on people expressing themselves.  Accept that people communicate in 
different ways so listen for the feelings as well as the facts.

> PARTICIPATION: All members participate in meaningful ways in the community 
> appropriate to their interests
> and abilities.
> 
> RESPECT: Members treat others with respect, even when disagreeing. We focus 
> on issues and not on persons.

Maybe “on issues rather than _personalities_”?

> SHARED DECISION MAKING: Members make decisions that prioritize the interests 
> of the community over
> those of any individual, as appropriate to the organizational unit. No 
> individual or group may dominate the
> group (e.g., as implemented by the practice of sociocracy).

David Graeber has a way of expressing this that doesn’t assume that a person is 
disregarding the community when they express their own needs and preferences. 
He says what is important is that people understand themselves as individuals 
who are members of the community. Neither the individual nor the community can 
exist without the other.

This separation is easily reinforced by putting the needs of the community 
ahead of personal needs. It feels righteous to praise the superiority of the 
community but this can oppress the individual to the detriment of the group. A 
strong group is one with strong individuals.

In sociocracy, the stress is on “consent” as a singular rather than “consensus" 
in its traditional definition which is closer to unanimous agreement. Each 
person consents individually. The solution must allow each person to remain a 
part of the community and to continue to participate enthusiastically. 
Otherwise, you sacrifice their energy and weaken the group. 

There are times when it might be necessary for a person to leave the group in 
order for the group to work energetically but it is more likely to be true that 
each person has something to contribute and solutions should allow everyone to 
contribute as fully as possible. Diversity has great value beyond appearances. 

Sharon
----
Sharon Villines
Takoma Village Cohousing, Washington DC
http://www.takomavillage.org