[Noisebridge-discuss] Consensus and the "old ways".

[Rachel McConnell]

Crutcher Dunnavant wrote:
> I object to the requirement that I be complicit or the asshole.
> 
> I object to the fact that no decision can outlast someone deciding to
> wall up the dj booth for giggles (though that was hilarious, seriously:
> epic).
> 
> I object to being told that its for my own good.
> 
> People don't always agree. Sometimes they stop fighting, if you yell at
> them enough. You haven't convinced them, you just beaten them down. I'd
> prefer a vote over the abuse. That's what I want changed.

If this is how it's happening for you, that means we are ALL doing it
wrong.  These are implementation issues, not (necessarily) the inherent
failings of consensus.

I would like to ask everyone who believes in the consensus process to
join me in pledging to change how we do it, because the whole point of
this is NOT to bully or beat anyone into anything.

In particular, I will (at least):

* Stay calmer at meetings
* Not threaten to block things, even as a joke, solely to make a point
* Accept that we need to take a longer time to decide some items
* Accept that we'll miss opportunities because we won't be able to
decide Y/N in time
* Learn more about how consensus has been done in other places; we
don't, for example, really use the "I object and disagree, but will not
actually block this" position, there's a name for it which I've heard
but don't recall and will have to look up.

Rachel