Sudo Room decided we would use various voting procedures for particular circumstances because we anticipated those issues arising and wanted to prevent our own immobility on them. I think this can be a good idea:

Can you (or anyone) generate a simple list of all the types of decisions the Omni Collective may consider in which perhaps a different sort of decision procedure than consensus should be used (e.g. a vote, and therefore some type of vote such as a super majority [some value over 50%] or simple majority vote [50%])?

I suggested in another email (did not see this reply at first) that we should consider allowing consensus to fail, and requiring we then table the item for one week before a 2/3 vote (or similar) can be held, encouraging clarity, accountability, feedback, and level-headedness.

// Matt


On Sun, Jul 20, 2014 at 7:59 AM, Jeremy Entwistle <jwentwistle@cryptolab.net> wrote:
We should pay our debts to the attorney. And we should pay rent as
though it we were required to pay it.

But for the consensus process, I think there should be limits in place
if we're going to use majority voting. If we're going to be using
majority voting, it should only be used to secure the space for the
collectives. There was an issue at another space where they needed to
get a permit to stay open, but somebody blocked consensus and used it as
leverage. I think using majority voting should be used ONLY for issues
that would prevent us from using the space and that those things should
be defined as explicitly as possible. For instance, we could use
majority voting for suspensions or bans.

Not to mention, I think the majority should be three-fourths or
four-fifths if we're really making an exception to consensus based on an
individual with bad intentions. Also, I'm not sure why we would have a
consensus vote if we were to switch a majority vote afterwards--that's
just a majority vote.

And lastly, is anybody interested in creating a proposal for a
distributed delegates for our collective? We would vote as a collective,
but it would give our members the opportunity to raise concerns and
issues about a decision at the main meeting instead of waiting to hear
back from a delegate.


On 07/19/2014 07:53 PM, Jenny Ryan wrote:
> Hey sudo!
>
> At Thursday night's Omni delegates meeting, the following proposals were
> put forth and are up for discussion over the next week, to be voted on
> at next Thursday's Omni meeting:
>
> 1. Paying Jesse
> Jesse Palmer is the Omni's lawyer and has done a phenomenal job
> helping us get to where we are now. His bill totals somewhere in the
> realm of $8500, which divided among 10 collectives means Sudo would
> contribute ~$850.
>
> 2.  Paying an additional month of rent into a reserve
> Our rent for July is free, but all collectives could pay rent for the
> month of July anyway to be put into a reserve fund. I think this is a
> great idea, and we have the funds for it (I believe we have ~$12,000
> in the bank).
>
> 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.
>
> Proposal : New Voting Model
>
> All votes called by the Delegate Council are subject to two rounds of
> voting. The first round passes by full consensus. If after friendly
> amendments and conversation full consensus cannot be achieved, the
> vote moves to a second round which passes by 2/3 majority. If this
> second vote fails to pass, the vote does not carry.
>
> This amendment to our full consensus voting procedures is proposed in
> light of advice from radical comrades and colleagues who have seen
> groups and projects torn apart by bad-faith exploitation of full
> consensus voting. Our group's aim and aspiration will always be full
> consensus, and we will always work to make sure all voices are heard.
> In all of our work and decisionmaking together, let us always be
> guided by fairness, kindness, and justice.
>
> ----
> Please discuss any issues posed by the above proposals, make
> amendments, and feel free to attend next Thursday's meeting if you'd
> like to participate!
>
> Cheers,
> Jenny
> http://jennyryan.net
> http://thepyre.org
> http://thevirtualcampfire.org
> http://technomadic.tumblr.com
>
> `~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`
>  "Technology is the campfire around which we tell our stories."
> -Laurie Anderson
>
> "Storytelling reveals meaning without committing the error of defining it."
>  -Hannah Arendt
>
> "To define is to kill. To suggest is to create."
> -Stéphane Mallarmé
> ~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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