Re: Consensus landscape? | <– Date –> <– Thread –> |
From: Sharon Villines (sharon![]() |
|
Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2012 09:47:47 -0700 (PDT) |
On Sep 24, 2012, at 12:13 PM, Louis Lieb <louislieb [at] yahoo.com> wrote: > I'm looking for a process that would yield a community decision on these > matters - what I would call a compromise. Is compromise consistent with > consensus? Compromies often end up making no one happy. The best option is to discuss all the wants and druthers and figure out a plan that addresses all of them. Don't forget planters and inside the CH. Planters can provide a place for a favorite plant that separates it visually from a garden of a different type. Exotics can go inside. A formal look might be good for entrances to buildings. One method of determining the strength of druthers without a humungously long discussion is range voting. Let people define the options and explain each one briefly. Make it fast. Put all the options on a list and each voter awards each one of them 1-5 stars. No opinion is a 0. People don't have to choose between one or the other. You score them using a spreadsheet. One person records as another reads them off. It goes very fast. Add up the scores and divide by the number of votes cast. The totals are interesting but even more interesting is looking at the ranges for each option. Some will be highly favored by a few or by a huge number. Others will be middling for everyone but not really desired by anyone. Range voting is very informative and often corrects some strongly held beliefs about other people and allows the quiet people to clearly express their interests. Another way to do this is to have the votes of the people who will actually be doing the work scored separately. The people who are doing the work are doing it for themselves but they are also doing it for all residents and using "other people's money." They probably shouldn't have all the say but they are much more likely to keep doing the work if they like the garden. You can only reach consensus if people share the same aim, can sit together until all objections are resolved, and are a defined group. You can't resolve objections well with a shifting membership. Also, no decision is forever and gardens are wonderfully changing. Part of the plan will just seeing what grows given the soil, sun, and amount of labor available. Laying out a strategy for change may be as important as the initial choices. Take a "let's try this" approach. Sharon ---- Sharon Villines, Washington DC Making Freedom and Equality a Reality http://www.adeeperdemocracy.org
-
Consensus landscape? Louis Lieb, September 20 2012
-
Re: Consensus landscape? Sharon Villines, September 20 2012
-
Re: Consensus landscape? Louis Lieb, September 24 2012
- Re: Consensus landscape? Sharon Villines, September 24 2012
-
Re: Consensus landscape? Louis Lieb, September 24 2012
-
Re: Consensus landscape? Sharon Villines, September 20 2012
-
Re: Consensus landscape? Karen Carlson, September 20 2012
- Values vs Aims [ was Consensus landscape?] Sharon Villines, September 21 2012
- Re: Consensus landscape? Jerry McIntire, September 21 2012
Results generated by Tiger Technologies Web hosting using MHonArc.