Re: Written rules | <– Date –> <– Thread –> |
From: Stuart Staniford-Chen (stanifor![]() |
|
Date: Fri, 26 Aug 94 00:14 CDT |
In response to Gareth's long post I wanted to say, firstly, that what I am about to say is not in any way intended to pass judgement on the specifics of that situation, about which I obviously don't know enough. However, our group has found on a number of occasions that it has been necessary (well, maybe not absolutely necessary, but felt to be at any rate) for us to make decisions and go ahead and do things without having the exact arrangements worked out. We have had to just trust that the other people in the group are good and reasonable people and that it will be ok, even though the legal details are not ok. An example is our common house - many people invested money in its conversion even though its ownership situation has not been properly worked out to this day. I'm not sure we could have done the conversion if we had first had to sort out how to own it (as evidenced by the fact that we still haven't sorted out how to own it). I think that most folks at N Street would agree that being willing to "trust the process" has been essential to what we've done. Of course it may be that we'll get into trouble later for not being more careful. Caveat: our situation may be different in that less money is involved as we aren't constructing from scratch. It was still enough for people to be worried though. Stuart. --------------------------------------------------------------------- Stuart Staniford-Chen stanifor [at] cs.ucdavis.edu N Street Cohousing, Davis, CA ---------------------------------------------------------------------
-
Written rules Gareth, August 25 1994
- Re: Written rules Stuart Staniford-Chen, August 25 1994
- Re: Written rules David G Adams, August 26 1994
Results generated by Tiger Technologies Web hosting using MHonArc.