I agree with Marc's position too.  I mostly wanted to take the position that a majority vote should be used as a last resort only, rather than as a rule, which it would eventually become if we start introducing this as a formal rule (the exception becomes the rule) .... but having different voting processes for different types of decisions makes more sense.

Also, I don't know if this is already the process, but as a way to move through tough situations, we could consider that at least one other member has to express support for a block in order to validate it... The 2/3 rule is sounding worse the more I think about it: you could have 3 members expressly against a proposal and still approve it.  That may not be sustainable long term.


On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 10:31 AM, <hol@gaskill.com> wrote:

just to clarify - i think we should definitely pay jesse without hassle or haggle, just procedure :)

 

 

On 2014-07-22 10:19, hol@gaskill.com wrote:

i personally wouldn't block this, but i think if we move toward a 2/3 majority, the larger collectives should get additional delegates.

 

also - has jesse provided an invoice for his work so far?  seems like we should see the invoice before agreeing to pay, as a matter of professional services protocol and recordkeeping.

 

 

On 2014-07-22 05:12, Marc Juul wrote:




On Sat, Jul 19, 2014 at 7:53 PM, Jenny Ryan <tunabananas@gmail.com> wrote:
 
Thanks Jenny!
 
3. Revision to Consensus Process:
Thus far, the Omni Collective has made decisions using a full
consensus model. The proposal on the table is for votes to strive for
full consensus, but resort to a 2/3 majority vote if consensus cannot
be achieved. This model was recommended by Jesse, who has extensive
experience representing coops and collectives who've run into problems
with full-consensus models for hairy decisions like banning an abusive
individual or - as may be the case with us - removing particular
groups/collectives from the larger collective.
 
I am blocking this one. We can implement different voting models for specific types of decisions similar to what sudo has. Revoking consensus completely is a lazy solution (and yes, this suggestion is equivalent to revoking consensus as the decision-making process).

--
marc/juul
 

_______________________________________________
sudo-discuss mailing list
sudo-discuss@lists.sudoroom.org
https://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss


_______________________________________________
sudo-discuss mailing list
sudo-discuss@lists.sudoroom.org
https://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss

_______________________________________________
sudo-discuss mailing list
sudo-discuss@lists.sudoroom.org
https://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss