Cohousing-L Mailing List: Re: We ditched consensus

[Racheli Gai (racheli]

Thanks, Sean.  It was a typo on my part (although perhaps a Freudian one, since 
I'd have preferred a majority to a super majority arrangement :))

Racheli.


On Sep 12, 2013, at 8:55 AM, Sean Davey wrote:

> 
> just a minor correction, our new system uses super majority voting, 2/3 yes 
> votes are required to pass.
> We use the same process that we used before for working on a decision:
> 1) answer clarifying questions, 2) collect concerns, 3) group concerns, 4) 
> attempt to resolve concerns.
> We've also automated agenda building online: proposals can be submitted by 
> anyone, once 12 people
> agree to discuss an issue it is moved to a list of agenda items, everyone can 
> prioritize agenda items
> and for each meeting the agenda is automatically generated based on 
> everyone's priority ranking.
> 
> if you asked each person in our community why consensus wasn't working, you'd 
> get a different answer
> from each person. (not everyone thought it wasn't working, a small number 
> wanted to stay with it)
> for me, a lot of what we were experiencing is covered in Diana Leafe 
> Christian's article:
> http://communities.ic.org/articles/1565/Busting_the_Myth_that_Consensus_with_Unanimity_Is_Good_for_Communities
> 
> sean, sonora cohousing
> 
>> 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.
> _________________________________________________________________
> Cohousing-L mailing list -- Unsubscribe, archives and other info at: 
> http://www.cohousing.org/cohousing-L/
> 
>