Cohousing-L Mailing List: Re: decision-making process

[Sharon Villines (sharon]

Kevin's post is so lucid I feel unfair about taking issue with it but again it 
is the word "block" that points to a problem in approaching a decision. 

First, proposals should include both reasoning and aims. The objections should 
be part of a process of examining arguments for and against the reasoning, the 
aims, and/or the proposed action. When someone can't consent, it is because 
they have an objection. Objections can be either clearly stated or teased out 
with the help of others. To call these objections "blocks" is to negate the 
purpose of objecting.

The process of decision-making is about logical argument, even when logic is 
based on personal feelings. NVC is a good technique for teasing out feelings, 
translating them into needs, and then into action. What happens in NVC is what 
needs to happen when considering objections.

Objections are good things because resolving them strengthens the proposal by 
suggesting amendments or clarifies the reason it is appropriate. This process 
educates everyone and brings the community together with greater understanding 
and acceptance of individual differences.

But understanding doesn't necessarily mean everyone has a common aim. The aim 
of the vegetarians to exclude turkey at a traditionally turkey meal was not the 
typical aim of welcoming diversity  characteristic of cohousing. This is an 
aims conflict and may require a majority vote, whether votes are actually 
counted or not.

But lack of a common aim, is not a "block". It's lack of a common aim.

"Block" feels like a concrete wall. The only way you can break it down is with 
a jackhammer or a tank. Or you can ignore it.

I understand that one often feels like others are "blocking" and I sometimes 
feel that I want to "block" myself. But I can't imagine why it is helpful to 
consider a person a concrete wall. A Block. A Block-Head. A Blocker. The 
language is wrong. it's like saying we are going to have a logical conversation 
but if you disagree with me you will be called a dog for the rest of the 
meeting.

Why is the majority never considered to be blocking? 

Voting is not the end of consensus as an ideal. Calling someone's lack of 
acceptance of the majority opinion a block, could be.

Sharon
----
Sharon Villines
Sociocracy: A Deeper Democracy
http://www.sociocracy.info