We ditched consensus | <– Date –> <– Thread –> |
From: Racheli Gai (racheli![]() |
|
Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2013 09:12:10 -0700 (PDT) |
Hi all, In case my previous message wasn't understood: Majority rule is now the method of decision making at our general meetings, instead of consensus (with a majority rule back-up), which is how we'd operated before. I will send in the near future something with more details, since I know that many communities are struggling, and our experience might be of use. Best, Racheli, Sonora Cohousing, Tucson, Arizona. On Sep 10, 2013, at 7:21 AM, Racheli Gai wrote: > I agree with Sharon, esp: "Voting would produce fewer casualties". > > Which is why here, in Sonora Cohousing (Tucson, AZ) we moved from "consensus" > (I'm putting it in quotation marks because it was never what consensus is > supposed to be) to super-majority voting rule last winter (or spring, I > forget the exact date.) > > My opinion: Voting isn't perfect, but it's been a great improvement over what > took place prior to it. > > Racheli. > > > On Sep 10, 2013, at 5:39 AM, Sharon Villines wrote: > >> >> >>> When a member threatens to block >> >> Why is anyone threatening anyone? Or feeling threatened by someone else? >> >> Language is very powerful: "Blockers." "Threatening." >> >> Perhaps what is happening that triggers this language is not decision-making >> at all. It sounds like football. Or war. >> >> In football and war, consensus decision-making is not an appropriate >> decision-making method. Two sides with conflicting aims can't reach >> consensus. There will be a winner and a loser. >> >> Announcing consensus by over-ruling objections on technical grounds, doesn't >> make it consensus. It makes it a game. Games are played by pre-determined >> rules. In games people who use the rules to their advantage, win. Everyone >> else loses. >> >> The rules for "blocking" in every community that uses this language are >> technical and arbitrary. Count the number of discussions. Count the number >> of days that have passed. Count the number of people who are still >> "blocking." The precision of this arbitrary counting of factors is then >> presented as fairness and objectivity. Even as community building. War >> builds community. >> >> Voting would produce fewer casualties. >> >> Sharon >> ---- >> Sharon Villines, Washington DC >> A Deeper Democracy: Making Freedom and Equality a Reality >> http://www.adeeperdemocracy.org >> >> >> >> >> >> _________________________________________________________________ >> Cohousing-L mailing list -- Unsubscribe, archives and other info at: >> http://www.cohousing.org/cohousing-L/ >> >> >
-
consensus blocking Fern Selzer, September 8 2013
-
Re: consensus blocking Patricia Lautner, September 9 2013
-
consensus blocking Sharon Villines, September 10 2013
- Re: consensus blocking Racheli Gai, September 10 2013
- We ditched consensus Racheli Gai, September 11 2013
- Re: We ditched consensus Sharon Villines, September 11 2013
- Re: We ditched consensus Kay Wilson Fisk, September 11 2013
- Re: We ditched consensus Sharon Villines, September 12 2013
-
consensus blocking Sharon Villines, September 10 2013
-
Re: consensus blocking Patricia Lautner, September 9 2013
Results generated by Tiger Technologies Web hosting using MHonArc.