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

[Shannon Lee]

I'm convinced that there's at least the feeling that there's a problem with
the consensus process; would you be willing to lead a working group to sort
out what the problems are, and come up with possible solutions, or
alternative process?
--S

On Tue, Oct 6, 2009 at 9:59 AM, Crutcher Dunnavant <crutcher at gmail.com>wrote:

>
>
> On Tue, Oct 6, 2009 at 8:29 AM, jim <jim at well.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> one comment below:
>>
>> On Tue, 2009-10-06 at 07:52 -0700, Sai Emrys wrote:
>> > On Tue, Oct 6, 2009 at 5:02 AM, Quinn Norton <quinn at quinnnorton.com>
>> wrote:
>> > > Again, these are specific _intellectual_ problems. If you could say
>> > > the consensus processes kills puppies and makes the net go down,
>> >
>> > How 'bout "consensus made the DJ booth less accessible"? :-P
>> JS: walling up the door to the dj booth was a prank; place blame
>> at the lap of "do-ocracy", which is independent of consensus (i.e.
>> we could have do-ocracy with a voting process or benevolent
>> dictatorship or .... some people approve; anyone can de-wall the
>> entrance; approvers think the ladder at the window is a good
>> solution--requires motivation for access to an unlocked space.
>>   re below: seems okay to me: not a big deal to undo it, not
>> as severe as building a car in someone's office, makes a point
>> re an intense email thread, nice alternative to yet another
>> intense email response.
>>
>>
> You asked about social bickering. This is what I was talking about. It is
> foolish to separate the consensus process from the governance of the space.
> The consensus process is not the means by which we make decisions, that
> happens constantly through direct action. The consensus process is the means
> by which we enforce decisions on future members. Once something is decided,
> we lock it down, and then say "well, to change that, you'll need consensus,
> and I like the way it is".
>
> I know I am in the minority. But it seems I am not alone. I have no
> expectation of effect other than discussion; and change must come slowly in
> a group like ours.
>
> I'm going to bow out of this conversation, because it seems to be getting a
> bit warm, or maybe I am.
>
> * I think there are practical problems with consensus.
> * I think there are moral problems with consensus.
> * I would like to convince others.
> * I would like to not spend every minute I'm in the space being grilled
> about it.
>
> Thank you.
>
>
>> >
>> > Unfair of course to blame it on consensus, but it doesn't seem like
>> > the product of a healthy process, even a healthily doöcratic one.
>> > FWIW, I mostly agree w/ Crutcher, except that I don't think it's as
>> > much an issue of consensus vs democracy vs whatever, but an issue of
>> > the tone of debate. (I use 'debate' here neutrally, as in a discussion
>> > about non-obvious but decidable questions where fallacies* [including
>> > informal ones, e.g. argumentam ad Hitlerium :p] are disallowed.)
>> >
>> > > Ok, I'm a fucking word pedant. I admit it.
>> >
>> > <3!
>> >
>> > - Sai
>> >
>> > * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies (kidding aside, this
>> > meta-discussion has seen quite a few...)
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
>> > Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
>> > https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
>> Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
>> https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Crutcher Dunnavant <crutcher at gmail.com>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
> Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
> https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss
>
>


-- 
Shannon Lee
(503) 539-3700

"Any sufficiently analyzed magic is indistinguishable from science."
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.noisebridge.net/pipermail/noisebridge-discuss/attachments/20091006/e0820461/attachment-0003.html>