[Noisebridge-discuss] All I want is 51% :)
jessica.r.ross at gmail.com
Fri Mar 28 20:54:36 UTC 2014
Don't you still get the Tyranny of the Majority problem with n-2?
On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 3:52 PM, Hannah Grimm <dharlette at gmail.com> wrote:
> I'd be in favor of tweaking consensus into an n-2 system, or of going to a
> democracy. I think either one would be a step forward for the space.
> I think that fundamentally most of the people here want very similar
> things, and that maybe if we could all stop screaming at each other,
> assuming the worst, accusing people of being literally Hitler, calling each
> other feds, etc. we might actually be able to get things done.
> On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 1:06 PM, Naomi Most <pnaomi at gmail.com> wrote:
>> (correcting myself: alright, a few people are saying the problems you
>> want to solve aren't problems.)
>> On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 12:54 PM, Naomi Most <pnaomi at gmail.com> wrote:
>> > People in favor of Consensus have also suggested "consensus minus 1"
>> > and "consensus minus 2". No one is saying the problems you're saying
>> > aren't problems.
>> > My core issue with your stance that you seem to be "overengineering"
>> > the solution, while overlooking the root causes of the disagreements
>> > that lead to these decisions having to be made in the first place.
>> > Furthermore, majority voting has many well-established problems. The
>> > term "tyranny of the majority" comes to mind. Likewise, it is easier
>> > -- and thus faster -- to pass legislation in that structure.
>> > Is rapid legislation something Noisebridge wants / should have? I
>> > would argue not.
>> > No, what Noisebridge needs are rapidly functioning systems to handle
>> > /specific/ recurring problems:
>> > * sleeping at the space
>> > * drug use at the space
>> > * harassment within the community
>> > * making sure stuff get fixed / replaced / maintained
>> > * controlling access to the space as needed.
>> > Can you name any other problems? (I'm honestly trying to make a
>> > comprehensive list here.)
>> > Now, can you name any voting, democratic body whose job it is to
>> > decide on the fate of errant individuals?
>> > We have branches of government for the above problems in the United
>> > States, and they are not legislative. And hey, look at that: the
>> > court system makes judgements on individuals by consensus.
>> > ...All except the Supreme Court, that is. I'd be more for Noisebridge
>> > having a Supreme Court than I would care to move NB to a general
>> > "everything goes to majority vote" scenario.
>> > --Naomi
>> > On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 12:00 PM, Al Sweigart <asweigart at gmail.com>
>> >> Really, I just want the membership to be able to pass/block things
>> based on
>> >> majority vote. If we got that, there'd be no need for me to be on the
>> >> and I'd resign. All the other stuff in those proposals from the board
>> >> either neutral about or don't think they were deal-breakers.
>> >> It's not that all of Noisebridge's problems would be solved if we got
>> rid of
>> >> consensus, it's that all of Noisebridge's problems would become
>> >> Consensus is what lets a single person walk in to a meeting an hour or
>> >> late and block something that would have otherwise passed. Talk about
>> >> "true" consensus is supposed to be, but this is what it is in practice
>> >> has been for the last five years. My thoughts have been that most
>> >> are against things like people sleeping and living at the space, but
>> >> been kept from fixing those problems because it only takes one person
>> >> veto any changes.
>> >> But if a majority of people (even at this point, when a lot of people
>> >> left NB or are staying away (see also, Double Union)) wanted things
>> >> sleep hacking and consensus, I'd just agree to disagree but
>> acknowledge that
>> >> that is what Noisebridge wants.
>> >> -Al
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
>> >> Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
>> >> https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss
>> > --
>> > Naomi Theora Most
>> > naomi at nthmost.com
>> > +1-415-728-7490
>> > skype: nthmost
>> > http://twitter.com/nthmost
>> Naomi Theora Most
>> naomi at nthmost.com
>> skype: nthmost
>> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
>> Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
> Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
Jessica R. Ross
jessica.r.ross at gmail.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Noisebridge-discuss