Cohousing-L Mailing List: Re: Revisiting Consensus

[dahako (dahako]

 Hi-

When I hear of a group thinking this hard (too much?) about the process to 
start the process, I always wonder if they're being a little nervous about 
possible conflict.? I generally advise leaping in with an open heart and seeing 
what happens.? Check to see what your community interests are NOW and see if 
the previous agreement still meets them.

On re-examining consensus after a couple of years have passed -- I don't know 
the specifics of your situation, but lots can change in 2 years. A community 
consensus may have occurred at some point in the past, but drift in practice, 
opinions, and people over time is pretty usual.? Checking in on all your 
agreements from time to time is probably wise.? I think Rob Sandelin has been a 
voice on this list calling for sunset provisions for each consensus to take 
some pressure off agreeing to them in the first place.

Jessie Handforth Kome
Eastern Village Cohousing
Silver Spring, Maryland
"Where we ate together last night and it was good."




 


 

-----Original Message-----
From: Fred H Olson <fholson [at] cohousing.org>
To: -cohousing-L mailing list <cohousing-l [at] cohousing.org>
Sent: Mon, 10 Sep 2007 7:35 am
Subject: [C-L]_ Revisiting Consensus










Joel Plotkin <joel.plotkin [at] sunyit.edu>
is the author of the message below.
It was posted by Fred the Cohousing-L list manager <fholson [at] cohousing.org>
since it was sent in html only which the list does not handle. We are
working on finding a way for Joel to send plain text.  Fred
--------------------  FORWARDED MESSAGE FOLLOWS --------------------

COHOrts:

A question regarding consensus--Our community uses consensus as our
decision-making process, with CT Butler's essay as a guideline. A
question arose yesterday about revisiting an issue on which consensus
had been reached several years ago. The more procedurally-oriented of us
(still hearing crackles, perhaps, from remaining synapses of Roberts'
Rules of Order) wanted first to reach consensus on a proposal to revisit
the earlier consensus. Others said that simply reopening discussion was
an implicit agreement to revisit the earlier consensus, but that without
a new consensus, the old decision stands. This last is what Butler
writes in his essay.

It seems to me, in the light of the morning, that trying to arrive at a
consensus to revisit an earlier consensus is inherently virtually
impossible, given that some members have already expressed some
disaffection with the earlier decision; that not agreeing to revisit the
issue undemocratically silences those who wish to reopen the discussion.

Our group has decided to continue work on the issue in a smaller group
(a traditional consensus next-step), implicitly acknowledging that the
earlier consensus IS being revisited, without a formal proposal to
revisit.

So here's where I'd like input: Do any of the consensus-based or
sociocracy groups have language about revisiting earlier consensi
(consensuses? consensim?) or experience that may help a group with very
varied backgrounds in consensus better understand this issue.

A further question: the issue at question is that our current Rules and
Regulations require members of the Community Owners Association to be
partners in our tree farm business venture, a separately-incorporated
LLC. Those Coho groups with attached or covalent businesses--how do you
handle the issue of a COA member not wishing to be joined legally to
that business?

Joel Plotkin
Hundredfold Farm
Orrtanna, PA


_________________________________________________________________
Cohousing-L mailing list -- Unsubscribe, archives and other info at: 
http://www.cohousing.org/cohousing-L/





 


________________________________________________________________________
Email and AIM finally together. You've gotta check out free AOL Mail! - 
http://mail.aol.com