Re: Consensus, Majority Vote, "Blocks" [was Report on Survey of Cohousing Communities 2011. Just released. A must read!
From: Wayne Tyson (landrestcox.net)
Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2011 12:33:20 -0700 (PDT)
CoHo:

I like reconciliation.

WT

----- Original Message ----- From: "Racheli Gai" <racheli [at] sonoracohousing.com>
To: "Cohousing-L" <cohousing-l [at] cohousing.org>
Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2011 7:46 AM
Subject: Re: [C-L]_ Consensus, Majority Vote, "Blocks" [was Report on Survey of Cohousing Communities 2011. Just released. A must read!




I completely agree with Sharon about the need to get away from
'compromise' as a word and as a good thing to work for in the context of
using consensus.

Racheli, Sonora Cohousing, Tucson.

On 09/26/2011 04:37 PM, Sharon Villines wrote:

On 25 Sep 2011, at 7:24 PM, Moz wrote:

One thing that I think Sharon's not
emphasising is a willingness to compromise outside of your
core values. I think it helps to be enthusiastic about the
prospect of compromise.
Perhaps accommodation or pleasing would be the best word here. Compromise can produce a result that doesn't make anyone happy. Poorly air-conditioned air, for example, is worse than too hot or too cold. It's stale and makes no one happy.

Working for the best possible solution for everyone allows you to begin looking at things in new ways. The compromise mind-set too often produces manipulation — I want 20 so I'll start with 200 and look like I'm giving something away when I settle for 30 — or simply halving the difference. I want 2 meals a week and you want 6 so we have to settle for 4. No one will be happy. The meal program won't be comprehensive, and those who can only participate in 2 will feel burdened by working for 4 or not participating at all (depending on circumstances).

So I tend to avoid the word "compromise".

What's become obvious to me in the last month or two as our
co-ho experiment moves into its third iteration is that the
shared aim is crucial, and it's often a long process to
discover what peoples aims actually are. Frustrating though
it is, a lot of people don't ever sit back and think about
what they want and form a strategy for getting it.
Or they hear everyone talking about things from their own framework and think everyone is talking about the same thing.

When we moved in, for example, one of the first things we discovered is that people had different basic concepts of the CH:

1. It was to be rented to support CH maintenance, repair, and operating costs. 2. It was like a hotel lobby, public, with signs everywhere for strangers. Instructions everywhere. 3. It was like an extension of our living space and residential. If you don't do it at home, you don't do it here.

We had been discussing the CH for two years, including a charrette, and these difference never showed up.

Instead
they just go with the flow and react to each new event in a
disconnected way. This makes it hard to guess their reaction
to new choices. They find it frustrating that they have to
keep explaining their gut reactions against things that are
just obviously wrong. It's a lot of work on all sides.
This is a nice characterization. I find that they also don't want policies. They feel oppressed by "rules" because they "might" limit them at some future time. Why do we need rules at all? We should just get along and go with the flow. Hang out, stop obsessing. Just enjoy your neighbors.

That's very hard for me. I like everyone on the same page, even if I don't like the page.

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


Results generated by Tiger Technologies Web hosting using MHonArc.