[New-imc] Breaking down the blocks: Arc and Freedom

[Blicero]

one small specification

i am seeing global lists become more and more burocratised as a form of self
protection from individual disruptor, up to proposing the institution of a jury

i think that the situation is simple
if individual disruptor cannot be brought to reasoning their "block" or whatever
you want to call it should be ignored since it's not a costructive bock but a
simply obstuctive block to collective efforts to build a network.
if they want to use indymedia networ as a form to feel powerful blockign around
they should go somewhere else


On Fri, Apr 25, 2003 at 06:58:07PM -0400, Jay wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> As far as I understand, many IMCs use many variants of consensus, each 
> finding its own particular way to be its most effective.  Many do use 
> formal consensus, but I don't think all do.  The question here is, are 
> there forms of consensus-based organizing that allow for 2/3 or other types 
> of deadlock-breaking votes?  Does having a 2/3 majority fallback option 
> available to break deadlocks mean that an IMC is not committed to the 
> principle of consensus decision-making?  Perhaps formal consensus does not 
> allow for this, do the principles of unity dictate, or were ever intended 
> to dictate, that every IMC exclusively use formal consensus?
> 
> The new-imc group would certainly benefit from having a clearer definition 
> of what the principles of unity mean by "consensus."  Does anyone have 
> links to any good, clear web sites on the different kinds of 
> consensus-based decision-making?
> 
> For this case, the principle states:
> an IMC "shall organize themselves collectively and be committed to the 
> principle of consensus decision making and the development of a [direct, 
> participatory democratic process] that is transparent to its membership"
> 
> I personally don't think that an IMC's having a 2/3 majority fallback 
> option means, inherently, that is is not committed to the principle of 
> consensus decision-making.  But, that's the point we have to hash out.
> 
> Jay
> 
> At 4/24/2003, you wrote:
> >It is an essential aspect of consensus that blocking concerns must go to 
> >the principles of the group.
> >
> >Allowing for 2/3 decision making to break deadlocks or in other such 
> >situations is clearly in line with the principle that IMCs:
> >
> >"shall organize themselves collectively and be committed to the principle 
> >of consensus decision making and the development of a [direct, 
> >participatory democratic process] that is transparent to its membership"
> >
> >This language clearly, purposefully and resolutely invokes a creative form 
> >that allows membership to decide it's own processes.
> >
> >If a local decides, for example, that 2/3 voting in certain situations is 
> >preferable to causing several members to leave the group, or to avoid 
> >continual deadlocks, it may very well be the process most in line with 
> >these principles.
> >
> >It is ironic to read that Arc and Freedom are so commited to their 
> >definition of consensus that they continue to invoke it after it failed to 
> >reach consensus in their collective.
> >
> >Also, just imagine the ridiculous stand-off that could ensue - Arc could 
> >block Roge unless they drop 2/3 and I could block Rogue unless they keep 
> >2/3....
> >
> >and, as boud1 pointed out to me,
> >
> > >http://truffula.net/pipermail/imc/2003-April/
> > >It's clear that IMC Rogue people are debating the issue, they are
> > >likely to spend time having practice with consensus training, some
> > >people favour 2/3, some favour consensus, but they're surely advanced
> > >enough in discussing this, on an openly archived list, and aware of
> > >the different possibilities, that they can be trusted by the network
> > >to come to a decision on decision-making which is similar enough to
> > >what other Indy collectives apply.
> >
> >I feel that Arc and Freedom's categoric blocking of an IMC for invoking 
> >2/3 forms of decision making must be set aside.
> >
> >Peace,
> >Nick
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >New-imc mailing list. Lista de correo New-imc
> >New-imc at lists.indymedia.org
> >http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/listinfo/new-imc
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> New-imc mailing list. Lista de correo New-imc
> New-imc at lists.indymedia.org
> http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/listinfo/new-imc

-- 
ciao
blicero