how do we make decisions?

[Leela]

So here's what I know about groups of people doing things: eventually,
a choice must be made, and people don't all agree. There are lots and
lots of models for resolving this: voting with a simple majority (more
than half), voting with higher percentages (like 80%) to true
consensus, where everyone has to agree, or agree to get out of the way
so the group can move forward (also called "standing down").

How do we make decisions?

[Karina Melendez]

Leela, this is a good point to consider---all your administrative "let's get this going, people" messages are great.

I vote for voting with higher percentages.

-karina

[JenniferD]

Me too, Leela - I like what you have done so far - keep up the good
work.

I'm not sure about this voting thing. Yes, I agree that we should
have a very high percentage of people in support of the decisions we
make. I see a problem with people not responding or being clear on
the votes however.

We definitely should set a time limit on all votes I think. Obviously
we are in many different time zones and working on various schedules,
so that would have to be taken into account, but IMO we need a way to
speed this stuff up. Maybe part of that is finding a more effect
means of communicating? Is this working for most people? I only get
emails from the group sporadically, and when I reply via email, it
doesn't work well. The RSS feed thing seems to work best for me, and
I have to actually log in here to respond.

How about giving Nicola extra vote(s), or we just all agree that we
will accept her decision in the case of a simple majority? I don't
see this as being a total democracy here.

And in the future who gets to vote? Only people who have given
introductions and say that they are in this, right?

Jennifer

[Realmcovet]

I agree. Time limits are good, and the higher percentage of votes
deciding what's going to take place sounds reasonable too.

Rachel

> > How do we make decisions?- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

[Leela]

So when we have a decision we need to make, we need to be really clear
that it needs a definite decision from the group--it needs to be
stated as such, and then we need to say, 'all votes must be in by x-y-
z to be counted'? that makes sense to me. I think if people don't
stay active enough to weigh in, they're choosing not to participate,
but that could just be me. :) I WOULD like to hear from more people
on this topic, since it will affect the whole workings of the group
moving forward. I'd also like to hear from Nicola: what kind of
superdelegate power would make sense for you to have? Since you're
the driving force behind this outfit it makes sense that you would
have some kind of final say.

So far I'm seeing the group favor high-percentage democracy as opposed
to consensus. What does everyone else think? Things we might decide
to vote on in the near future include the theme of this project and
the level of editing or review to which we subject submissions.

Whenever the decision requires a lot of research, we should also
consider delegating to a small group among us and reviewing/accepting
their recommendation. My guess is that after we've discussed it, the
"how should we print this thing" decision would be best made that way.

Still listening...
Leela

[JenniferD]

I don't think I was being clear. Here's what I would like: a
majority vote of say 75% with Nicola getting to vote at least 25% of
that. Or a simple majority with Nicola (or Kelley as her proxy)
having veto power.

There is no quorum. Those that speak up by the deadline for the vote
get to vote, those that don't (or ask for an extension) don't get a
say. So if only 6 people vote they decide. If someone is going to be
unavailable for a period of time, but wants their voice heard, then
they need to let us know.

Jennifer

[Kelley Eskridge]

Nope, no proxy here. I don't speak for Nicola re: the co-op, and
when you get my opinion you are only getting mine, not hers.

Jennifer, thanks for bringing that up so I can clarify.

K

[JenniferD]

Oh, yeah, I'm good at providing opportunities for clarification. :)
I did actually mean to say if she/they want to -- in case of
unavailability.

Thanks for the clarification.

Jennifer

[Adam Lowe]

Good stuff. I agree with the majority democracy thing. And I don't mind Nicola having the power of veto.

Cheers

2009/2/3 JenniferD <in...@jenniferdurham.com>

--
Regards

Adam Lowe

Features Editor
Bent [http://mag.bent.com]
Editor-in-Chief
Polluto [http://www.polluto.com]
Publisher/Editor
Dog Horn Publishing [http://www.doghornpublishing.com]

Mobile: +44 (0) 7906 242 232
Office: +44 (0) 113 279 3573


If you would like to stop receiving these emails, please reply with UNSUBSCRIBE in the subject.