https://devsummit.aspirationtech.org/index.php?title=Consensus_decision_making_is_bad_for_social_justice&feed=atom&action=historyConsensus decision making is bad for social justice - Revision history2024-03-29T06:22:01ZRevision history for this page on the wikiMediaWiki 1.35.1https://devsummit.aspirationtech.org/index.php?title=Consensus_decision_making_is_bad_for_social_justice&diff=509&oldid=prevVivian: 1 revision imported2015-05-05T18:28:27Z<p>1 revision imported</p>
<p><b>New page</b></p><div>Consensus Session<br />
<br />
Go around (reasons for showing up)<br />
-looking for alternate but still democratic decision making process<br />
-looking for decision making processes that give same power to Yes's as No's<br />
-people finding consensus works<br />
-looking for better outcomes of consensus<br />
-looking for tools for less pain<br />
-looking for things between theoretical and practical<br />
-blurry consensus processes<br />
-look transfer experience fron icon design consensus process<br />
<br />
Why consensus sucks<br />
-default reaction to hearing "we use consensus" is what do you mnean by that<br />
<br />
Quilted Consensus Process<br />
-statement of problem<br />
-having a proposal<br />
-asking clarifying questions<br />
-having concerns restated<br />
-discussion on what would meant those concerns<br />
-either go forward or start with new proposal<br />
-approval or denial or send to an committee<br />
<br />
-Process came from a workshop retreat<br />
-visual actions (like raising thumbs)<br />
-Their process does not have a consensus of when a block should happen<br />
-different meaning of stand asides, abstain<br />
<br />
<br />
Additions to Process<br />
--time period for proposals before they get brought up <br />
--the archipegal of the many islands of modified consensus<br />
--group has a one block per x years per person<br />
--frustrations with altered proposals as opposed to friendly amendments<br />
--question on how developed a proposal should be before coming up in decision making process<br />
--answer, implementation is a big missing piece. the approval is just the basic part of the process<br />
--how is the decision made to go to the formal process<br />
--many times it only comes to the formal process in "bad" situations<br />
--friendly amendment<br />
--how you view whose proposal it is, does a proposal become the group's proposal when given?<br />
--adhoc groups don't really use formal process, but its used to address concerns<br />
<br />
<br />
Framing issues with Consensus, especially in regard to oppression<br />
--consenses was formalized in WTO protests in Seattle in 1999<br />
--major unrepresentation of less privileged of folks in decision making process<br />
--consense tends to break down in situations where a group is more diverse<br />
--consensus was not created in diverse bodies<br />
--when consensus breaks down, it breaks down worse<br />
--can create coercision and manipulation<br />
--proposals can lead to too many proposals, instead of real colloborative work to solve 1 problem<br />
--non privilige folks get coerced and end up being disengaged<br />
--real consensus doesn't happen because of the disengagement<br />
--consensus can be the tyrany of the whiningest, often the person with the most privilege, creates a big diversive situation<br />
--can often amplify power dynamic problems in a group<br />
--voting gives transparancy<br />
--people can block just to exercise power, sometimes because they feel disengaged in general and want to feel strength<br />
--friendly amendments can water down proposals<br />
-recognizing crypto hierarchy, sometimes process can be used to strenghten that hidden hierarchy<br />
<br />
-voting can make dissent more visible<br />
-consensus was very attractive, seemed overpowering, seemed that process checks power, process helps engagement, but doesn't do it all<br />
--facilitators can do much more<br />
--not that scrapping process is the way to go, but acknowledge that it is not enough<br />
-sometimes forceful proposals can have extra power<br />
-for consensus the importance about having the block be a really rare tool to be used<br />
-acknowleges that consensus can bring in power dynamnics, but facilitator awareness can prevent disengagment<br />
-good facilitation can be aware that not everyone engages the same, speaking, writing, time to think things through<br />
-consensus can break down when you take things like class, i.e. people of certain class cannot engage in the same way (jobs, kids, ...)<br />
<br />
<br />
No Process<br />
-strive for everyone agreeing, but all available tools should be used based on need<br />
-unanimous decsions rather than consensus<br />
-strong individual identities can lead to tough decision making without strong group identity<br />
-looking at consensus as more a tool, rather than the full solution<br />
<br />
<br />
-chart of consensus shows history of battles, rather than a simple methodology to come to agreement<br />
-trust issues play a important factor<br />
-difficult in coming with strategies in distributed networks<br />
<br />
<br />
Tools<br />
-facilitation works best with community agreement<br />
--let the community come up with their own rules<br />
--one diva one mic<br />
--no one knows everything, together we know alot<br />
--keep it simple<br />
--what said stays here, whats learned here goes out<br />
--recognize we speak from our own experiences<br />
--move up move up, similar to step up step back, term changes acknolwedge those that can't step<br />
--be aware of time<br />
--listen with love<br />
--assume best intentions<br />
--we can't all be articulate all the time<br />
<br />
-rules are important<br />
--when things go awry, community agreements can be held up as why things are going wrong in a less personal way<br />
--helps facilitator do their job as they can pull back to the document<br />
--meeting place is not a place for personal call outs, just using agreements to productively move forward<br />
<br />
<br />
-Expected actions for agenda items, unfortunately the default goes to decide way too early<br />
--discuss<br />
--feedback<br />
--questions<br />
--share<br />
--brainstorm<br />
--listen<br />
--decide<br />
<br />
Photos from the session: [http://bit.ly/uUK9s4 Photo 1] [http://bit.ly/up04m9 Photo 2]</div>Vivian