User:Douginamug/Notes:Consensus decision-making

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Blah[edit]

With a description of the history ahead for context, we run into the tricky topic of describing what It is (now.) There is clearly a practical element, and also an ethical element (and perhaps more.) Writing about the practical and ethical separately seems wise. I think it makes sense to have ethics first. There is no perfect way to right this, and that's OK.

Ethics[edit]

David Graeber, writing during Occupy Wall Street, went as far as saying "Consensus is not a set of rules. It's a set of principles."[1]

Practice[edit]

There is no official consensus decision-making practice due to its decentralized, grassroots origins. However, the numerous, independent guides and manuals that have been published since the 1970s share broadly overlapping suggestions.[2][3][4][5] Groups adopt consensus at various levels of formality: from completely informal, to a written internal process or even by specifying it in the articles of their legal entity.

Consensus centers around collaborative discussion between equals: a type of egalitarian dialogue or deliberation. The classical situation is an in-person meeting, but any medium which allows free-form communication can be used, such as online meetings[5]: 74 , forums, wikis[6]: 1 , mailing lists or for-purpose platforms[7].

Through discussion, the group aims to find a proposal which address the issue at hand and satisfies the group's consensus criteria. This involves not only creating and amending proposals to fit the opinions of the group, but also changing the opinions of the group to understand and accept proposals.[5]: 12  Groups may follow a conceptual framework to productively guide the discussion towards consensus proposals, commonly featuring an initial phase were ideas are creatively brainstormed, a middle phase where the relative merits of the different ideas are discussed, and a final phase where a single proposal is attempted to be formed.

Roles and methods . . . (there's a billion important adjacents... keep practice to core?)

Proposals are tested and finalized for consensus by participants clearly stating their opinion. This may be called for by the facilitator, or by a participant. There are typically (at least) three ways to respond:

  • Agree: the participant consents to the proposal and positively supports it. (Also called: support,)
  • Stand aside: the participant consents to the proposal, but does not positively support it. (Also called: abstain, accept, consent, agree with reservations)
  • Block: the participant does not consent to the proposal. (Also called: veto, oppose)

Criteria for consensus is usually defined as full consent of all participants (e.g. only 'agree' and 'stand aside'; no 'blocks')[3]: 13 [4]: 27 [5]: 23  Some claim that decision rules other than full consent still qualify the entire practice as consensus.[8] Consent here means acceptance, not necessarily satisfaction, although most groups desire to reach proposals that all participants positively support. As such, block functions as a veto, postponing the decision and returning the group to discussion, although the block is only sometimes thought of as a right to veto. Requirements and/or restrictions on who or why a block may be expressed:

  • opposition must be strong enough that member would leave group if it went ahead
  • ground for blocking must justified on group principles
  • blocker must actively work out alternative and present at next meeting

Groups may also define a 'fall back' situation where if a consensus can't be reached, a decision can be made via another method.

  • if consensus not reached after time limit
  • if consensus not reached after meeting limit
  • ?

Once the fallback criteria has been fulfilled,

  • -1, -2, -n
  • super majority
  • simple majority


Organizations that use consensus:[edit]

Consensus-oriented:[edit]

References[edit]

  1. ^ "David Graeber: Some Remarks on Consensus | OccupyWallSt.org". occupywallst.org. Retrieved 2022-06-04.
  2. ^ Coover, Virginia; Deacon, Ellen; Esser, Charles; Moore, Christopher (1977). Resource manual for a living revolution (1st ed.). Philadelphia, PA and Gabriola Island, BC: New Society Publishers. ISBN 0-86571-015-5. OCLC 12048487.
  3. ^ a b Avery, Chel; Auvine, Brian; Streibel, Barb; Weiss, Lonnie (1981). Building United Judgment: A Handbook for Consensus Decision Making (1st ed.). The Center for Conflict Resolution, Madison, WI.
  4. ^ a b Gelderloos, Peter (2006). Consensus : a new handbook for grassroots political, social and environmental groups (PDF) (1st ed.). Tucson, AZ: See Sharp Press. ISBN 1-884365-39-6. OCLC 76259918.
  5. ^ a b c d A consensus handbook : co-operative decision-making for activists, co-ops and communities (PDF) (1st ed.). Lancaster, England: Seeds for Change Lancaster Cooperative Ltd. 2013. ISBN 978-0-9575871-0-6. OCLC 925312774.
  6. ^ a b "Wikipedia:Consensus", Wikipedia, 2022-08-05, retrieved 2022-08-10
  7. ^ "Loomio | decision-making for collaborative organizations". Loomio. Retrieved 2022-08-08. Advice, consent, consensus or build your own decision-making processes.
  8. ^ Leafe Christian, Diana (2012-06-08). "Busting the Myth that Consensus-with-Unanimity Is Good for Communities". Foundation for Intentional Community. Retrieved 2022-08-08. The first part of consensus is the process... The second part is sometimes called the "decision rule"... Unanimity or full consent is one possible way to decide things after the consensus process.
  9. ^ Radical Routes (2015). "An Introduction to Radical Routes" (PDF). Retrieved 2022-06-01. At gatherings a method called 'consensus decision making' is used to make sure that the views of individuals or minorities are not disregarded. ... If objections to the proposal are not resolved by the time the proposal reaches its third gathering the proposal can be voted on.
  10. ^ "RFC 7282 - On Consensus and Humming in the IETF". datatracker.ietf.org. Retrieved 2022-06-01.
  11. ^ Rhizome (2011-06-02). "Near-consensus alternatives: Crowd Wise". Welcome to the archived Rhizome website for useful resources. Retrieved 2022-06-01.
  12. ^ Designing an all-inclusive democracy : consensual voting procedures for use in parliaments, councils and committees. P. J. Emerson. Berlin: Springer. 2007. ISBN 978-3-540-33164-3. OCLC 184986280.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: others (link)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Douginamug/Notes:Consensus_decision-making&oldid=1103670037"