Concensus decision making

This was developed by the Quakers originally, but similar principles
have been used since pre-history.

"Their natural way of doing it [reaching a decision] is to discuss it
 at length, ... until public opinion has settled overwhelmingly in one
 direction"

Obviously, this doesnt work so well with large groups.. But as I pointed
out earlier, large groups tend to fragment.

Concensus is NOT the same as voting. Nor does it mean unanimity. Groups
sometimes think they are using concensus but revert to voting when they
cant all agree. 

When we vote, we are still using dualism - here is one choice, or another.
The choice we will make is the one of the majority. Thus the majority
wields power over the minority.

The ethics of integrity however, give no-one the right to wield power
over another. With concensus, the story is different.

Concensus is based on the principle that every voice is worth hearing,
every concern is justified. If a proposal makes a few people, even one
person, deeply unhappy - then there is a valid reason for that unhappiness,
and if we ignore it, we are likely to make a mistake.

Instead of spending energy trying to convert people to agree to something
they dont want, we drop either or both alternatives and look for a new
solution, one that satisfies everyones concerns. The universe is not
either/or choices, it is "rich with infinite possibilities"

How it works..

The concensus usually works with a facilitator, who is agreed by the group
at the start of the meeting. 

One person puts forward a proposal. The facilitator makes sure everyone
gets a chance to put forward concerns, or speak for it. Negative reactions
are not expressed as hard/fast positions. Instead of saying "I am
catagorically against it", you say "I am concerned about it, becuase..."
Voicing concerns allows the proposal to be modified to meet those proposals.

If a person feels thier concerns cannot be met, and the group is
enthusiastic, they can "stand aside", and simply not participate in that
part of the group.

If they have STRONG objections to a proposal that affects them, they
can _block_ the proposal. Blocks are used rarely and carefully. But the
block gives each individual ultimate power to influence decisions that
affect her/him. If someone feels strongly enough about something to
block it, they are probably aware of factors the group should consider
more carefully.

Concensus takes time. Its also fails to work well in large groups, simply
becuase there isnt time to hear everyone. It also cant deal with
dualist questions imposed from outside the community.



=============
Roles within a concensus based group (names from Starhawk)


The Facilitator

The facilitator observes the content of talk in a meeting. They keep
the meeting focussed and moving. Commonly people will drift off the
subject under discussion and begin talking about something else. The
facilitator reminds them what the subject is, and if necessary 
arranges for later discussion of new issues raised.

>From time to time the facilitor may summarise what has been said so far,
and what has been decided as relevant.

The facilitor calls on people to speak. It is their job to ensure that
everyone has the chance to state thier concerns.

The facilitator should be neutral on the subject being dicussed. If they
hold strong views, another faciliator can be chosen for that topic.

Timekeeper

The timekeepers job, when time is limited, is to ensure that people remain
aware of how much time is passing discussing each item.

Peacekeeper

Peacekeepers function not only during meetings, but whenever the group is
active. Thier role is to keep order and prevent crises. They defuse
potential violence from outside the group or within it.

Notestaker

The notestaker takes notes and ensures that they are presented to the
group for checking. "This should be the person who monopolises the
conversation most"

Coordinator

Coordinators act as a switchboard - they keep track of what is being done,
who is doing it and what needs to be done. "It is a marvellous opertunity
to make mistakes and learn to take critisism". Coordinators should
switch roles often.
