drew at riotnrrd.com
Wed Feb 26 23:46:06 UTC 2014
Whoops, reply to all, not just to Ronald,
No, a democracy is when everyone gets an equal vote and the majority vote
In my stupid idea there's a randomized element where one person's vote is
worth more than everyone else's. They are just as powerful towards pushing
through things that would be otherwise blocked as they are towards blocking
things that would be otherwise pushed through.
I believe this would drastically cut down the time spent trying to achieve
consensus, and if the matter were re-opened at another meeting, the
likelihood of the same person having the "special vote" status would be
It's also worth noting that many people on this list seem to be saying "
*consensus*" when they actually mean "*unanimity*". Consensus, by
definition, does *not *mean 100% agreement by everyone involved, but rather
a general or majority agreement.
Drew Smith (mux) <drew at riotnrrd.com>, VA7DSX / VE0TF
Encrypted e-mail preferred, public key at http://riotnrrd.com/pubkey.gpg
On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 2:12 PM, Ronald Cotoni <setient at gmail.com> wrote:
> That's a democracy not consensus. Any 1 member can block but that might
> work. Either way requires us to be more vigilant and present in the space.
> On Feb 26, 2014 1:51 PM, "Drew Smith" <drew at riotnrrd.com> wrote:
>> Here's a stupid idea I had:
>> How about at each meeting, at the counting of attendees, all names of
>> those in attendance go into a hat (ideally software). The total number of
>> attendees is the variable N.
>> One name is picked from the hat. That person is now special, and their
>> votes on concensus items count for N/2 votes, rounded down.
>> Concensus is declared when there are N votes for a concensus item.
>> A functional example; say there are 22 people at the meeting. Dave's name
>> is drawn at random, so he is worth 11 votes. He does not have enough power
>> to push through something by himself, but he does have the power to
>> override some blockers. A vote to ban someone comes up, and without Dave's
>> vote the tally is 18 votes for the ban and 3 votes against - Dave's vote is
>> worth 11 votes, and he votes for the ban, so the final outcome is 29 votes
>> for, 3 against, with concensus declared at 22 votes.
>> Thoughts? What about if the special person received N/3 votes? Some other
>> - Drew.
>> Drew Smith (mux) <drew at riotnrrd.com>, VA7DSX / VE0TF
>> Encrypted e-mail preferred, public key at http://riotnrrd.com/pubkey.gpg
>> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
>> Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Noisebridge-discuss