[Oe List ...] Respectful Dialogue

Fri Oct 12 10:31:56 EDT 2007

May I ask for a little more clarity and perhaps some education for  
myself from those commenting on consensus as a decisional method?   
What I heard was that consensus could be used by the majority to  
crush the minority, and that a more evolved process goes beyond  
consensus method.  I would like to know what decision method can not  
be misused, and when we talk about processes that goes beyond setting  
around a table and explaining, if experimenting is somehow not part  
of achieving consensus.  Just what would you call it?

My experience has been that there are no processes that cannot be  
misused, but some seemed rigged for the majority (Roberts Rules,  
simple votes), though even there some genuine decisions arise.   
Consensus seems more aimed toward the future, and can allow for a  
multiplicity of views.  I have found no better way to get things on  
"top of the table."  The hardest thing for any organization to do is  
to make a "real" decision.  I've been impressed with both the  
corporate and non-profit world I've had opportunity to experience  
have leaned toward some form of consensus making, some more complex  
than another.

George Holcombe
14900 Yellowleaf Tr.
Austin, TX 78728
Home: 512/252-2756
Mobile 512/294-5952
geowanda at earthlink.net

On Oct 12, 2007, at 8:49 AM, Nancy Lanphear wrote:

> Dear Friends,
>
> As we were forming our community of Songaia, we decided that we  
> would use consensus for decision making.  However, we have the gift  
> of having a couple of folks who hold us to hearing and honoring  
> each individual voice in the process and the concern that Herman  
> voiced is acknowledged.  Of course, this sometimes works better  
> than others, but we put energy into making it work.  Nearly 8 years  
> later, we have another way of processing  - it is called a decision  
> board.  An individual or committee can write a proposal, send it  
> out by email and post it on the decision board.  The name of each  
> community member is listed on the proposal followed by 3 columns:  
> 1)  I agree, 2) I need more discussion, 3) I will help fund the  
> project.  If there are folks (1 or more) who need more discussion,  
> we set a time and gather folks to work it through.  Folks who want  
> to see the project happen might help to fund it or we request money  
> from our abundant fund to carry out the project.  There are times  
> when folks will stand aside but not block the decision but usually  
> we work at the proposal so that people are ready to go with it.   
> There continue to be decisions that we need to talk through as a  
> whole group - and so we do.
>
> Let me give a fun example:  Early on in our life together, one  
> family wanted to have chickens.  The chickens would provide us with  
> eggs, an education about where our eggs and chicken meat came from  
> (not the supermarket), and how it gets to our table (killing), and  
> fertilizer for the garden.  Several folks in the community were  
> quite concerned about the noise (roosters), some did not want the  
> smell around the community.  No one really wanted the chicken coop  
> in their "back yard.   About 2 years ago, 3 folks stepped forward  
> with a proposal - no roosters and the coop (a chicken tractor*)  
> would be placed in the garden (not really in anyone's back yard).   
> Well - there was still a concern about the original two issues plus  
> a third big issue - AVIAN FLU!
>
> Fred gathered folks together for conversations and explained how  
> the noise and smell were being dealt with - folks seemed to  
> understand at this point.  The avian flu was a tough one- but it  
> was decided that if avian flu showed up in the USA, we would get  
> rid of the chickens.   Finally we had consensus given the  
> explanations of how the project would be handled AND a hearty YES  
> from the 11 children in the community.
>
> The saga continues - we all love the chickens, the eggs AND the one  
> rooster who came with the lot of chicks (sometimes telling their  
> sex at birth is difficult) in the beginning.  He crows at any time  
> of day or night but he helps structure the lives of the hens in a  
> rather creative way!
>
> *Our chicken tractor is quite a sight.  The house (8 ft X 3 ft) is  
> made of green plastic siding with a roost and 3 nests inside.  It  
> can be moved each week since it is built on 2 riding mower  wheels  
> and has a handle on the back side.  There are two portable chicken  
> runs, one on each end of the coop which detach for moving  
> purposes.  Food and water are piped into the coop.  The coop/runs  
> are designed to fit into our garden beds.  These birds have become  
> part of our recycling program here at Songaia, they eat nearly all  
> of our scraps from the kitchen.
>
> (In case you would like to have such a feature (chicken coop and  
> run)  in your yard, please send $1.00 to Fred.)
>
> Yours in community and in fun,
>
> Nancy
>
>
> On Oct 12, 2007, at 5:38 AM, Herman Greene wrote:
>
>> Most small groups effectively do work by consensus. Yet, consensus  
>> is something I cannot back as a policy for virtually any group. It  
>> too easily becomes a form of tyranny of the majority over the  
>> minority.
>>
>>
>>
>> Herman
>>
>>
>>
>> From: oe-bounces at wedgeblade.net [mailto:oe-bounces at wedgeblade.net]  
>> On Behalf Of George Holcombe
>> Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2007 9:28 AM
>> To: ICA LIST SERVE; Order Ecumenical Community
>> Subject: Re: [Oe List ...] Respectful Dialogue
>>
>>
>>
>> A memory flashes back out of these last few days of emails.
>>
>>
>>
>> We used to say:
>>
>> 1. Humor is better than seriousness.
>>
>> 2. Yes before no
>>
>> 3. Phariseeism more dangerous than libertinism
>>
>>
>>
>> It's interesting that the World Council of Churches has now  
>> introduced consensus making as its form of decision making and  
>> that the United Methodist Church in its reorganization as a global  
>> church is looking at adapting that too at the next General  
>> Conference.
>>
>>
>>
>> Wouldn't it be a pity if we forgot what we pushed into history  
>> along with others, and if what defined us is what we choose to  
>> remember about our past and what offends us about others.
>>
>>
>>
>> Could it be we are being challenged to learn how to use email as a  
>> significant way to push us into the future?
>>
>> George Holcombe
>>
>> 14900 Yellowleaf Tr.
>>
>> Austin, TX 78728
>>
>> Home: 512/252-2756
>>
>> Mobile 512/294-5952
>>
>> geowanda at earthlink.net
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> OE mailing list
>> OE at wedgeblade.net
>> http://wedgeblade.net/mailman/listinfo/oe_wedgeblade.net
>
> _______________________________________________
> OE mailing list
> OE at wedgeblade.net
> http://wedgeblade.net/mailman/listinfo/oe_wedgeblade.net

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://wedgeblade.net/pipermail/oe_wedgeblade.net/attachments/20071012/175dc340/attachment-0001.html 