Cohousing-L Mailing List: Rules, norms, and compromise

[Gordon (weil]

When our co-op was set up the saying then and now was that "there are no rules, 
only norms."  We only have 7 people, so it is relatively easy for us to live 
with fluid guidelines.  Rob's point is well taken, to wit:

>The unwritten rules form sort of a community culture which sets the 
>expectations.  It may take a long time for a newcomer to an established 
>group to understand this culture since it is not written down anywhere.

However, even written rules have to be interpreted in light of the community 
culture.  The extent that they are flexible and the ways they can be challenged 
or changed are not readily apparent except to those who have participated in the
community for quite some time.

One advantage of norms is that it is more difficult for people to abuse norms 
the way people abuse rules.  Rules tend to give power to those  whose life style
and nature tend to abide by them, and they tend to silence discussion and 
discourage creative solutions.  Norms are fluid, and their existence encourages 
communication and other virtues, like backing away from specifics in order to 
discuss general concepts.  Of course, norms don't necessarily protect the 
community from abuse the way rules can.  I tend to think that the community is 
in more danger when it fails to acculturate rather than when it fails to 
control.

Compromise belongs with a rule-based community more than a norm-based community.
If there is only one way to do things, then compromise is necessary.  But if 
people realize they are working together towards mutual understanding and a set 
of guidelines, then reaching consensus is a process to evolve ideas rather than 
to compromise them.  

- Gordon Weil
  Omega house