Cohousing-L Mailing List: Re: Language used in decisions

[Sharon Villines (sharon]

> On Sep 9, 2015, at 12:59 PM, Elizabeth Magill <pastorlizm [at] gmail.com> 
> wrote:
> 
> These days I'd like to have a go-around where everyone says what they think 
> the policy *means* before we call for cards.
> Others roll their eyes when I suggest this, but I think we have had more 
> disagreements after we've approved decision than before the decision was made.

I get the same response when a round is suggested but after a round things 
always go smoother. The debate becomes a discussion and the proposal is more 
easily amended or rejected or approved with conditions.

In a recent decision, a round would have reduced the time required to decide 
the issue and resulted in much less strum und drang. In the first meeting 
several people were totally silent during discussion but when the decision was 
called objected to everyone else’s surprise. We approved the proposal with 
stand asides, but during the next two weeks, the decision fell apart as they 
didn’t accept it. 

It was put on the agenda again for the next meeting and we made a completely 
different decision and many more people were happy with it. I didn’t agree with 
the second decision but in the face of so many people wanting it, it was 
clearly the best option. If we had done a round to start with that would have 
been clear in a quarter of the time and with no (or little) resentment.

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