[Noisebridge-discuss] a couple of things from the meeting today, on consensus and time
neurofog at gmail.com
Wed Feb 26 22:31:31 UTC 2014
I've been looking at the consensus process lately, and
the perceived "power" structure at NB.
Adding to your suggestions, I think making a point of recommending that
members have the option of stating their position on a proposal ahead of a
meeting, by adding a note to the wiki if they have strong views on a
particular item, and would probably block (or stand aside) if present at a
This avoids the issue where an item comes up for consensus after being
tabled without all interested parties being present at a particular meeting.
On Tue, Jan 7, 2014 at 11:38 PM, Dana <dana-lists at sonic.net> wrote:
> I'm putting this idea out there as people seemed intrigued by it at the
> meeting! This is the consensus process we used when I lived in a large
> housing cooperative (~30 people at any given time), which I don't think is
> terribly uncommon:
> We had weekly meetings and managed by consensus similar to Noisebridge.
> Agree, stand-aside, block. Three stand-asides or a block (uncommon) stopped
> a proposal from moving forward.
> When an issue could not find resolution (meaning it was brought up
> multiple times and blocked) it would come up at a quarterly membership
> meeting, where it would require a 75% super majority to pass. In the
> several years I lived there this happened only 3 or 4 times, the vast
> majority of contentious issues were resolved before coming to a vote.
> (I also think if NB adopts something like this, it's worth looking at the
> membership process and possibly erasing the distinction between members and
> associate members.)
> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
> Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Noisebridge-discuss