[New-imc] Indymedia's definition of Consensus is not 3/4 fall back vote

[freedom]

Jay,
You asked for links concerning consensus.     I'll repeat here the link that
was previously posted concerning Indymedia's documents, and list three others 
as well so that they are easily referenced.   I ask everyone on new-imc to 
read the references at these links.  People must understand consensus 
decision making before they can responsibly make a decision about it.

Reading throught Indymedia's documents concerning consensus the only
 reference to majority vote I found is under the title "Direct Democracy"
 (contrasting this and other forms of decision making with consensus) "Even a
 2/3 majority on a decision would exclude 1/3...".  IMCs using a fall back to
 2/3, 3/4 or whatever, are not following a consensus decision making model
 that is consistent with Indymedia documents concerning consensus. 
 Furthermore, falling back to majority rule is not consistent with any of the 
standard models of consensus decision making. This is majority rule with a 
patronizing nod toward consensus.  See:

http://docs.indymedia.org/view/Global/ConflictResolutionIndymedia's

I offered earlier the following link to papers on consensus decision making.
Not all are good, but some are excellent.

http://www.vernalproject.org/RPapers.shtml#CoopDecMaking

John's April 25 posting to imc-process lists the following links concerning
consensus.  He makes insightful comments in his posting as well.

 http://www.consensus.net/flowchart.html
and
http://store.ic.org/products/democracy-in-small-groups.html

As Indymedia makes a decision about rogue a precident will be set.  We will
either choose to operate by consensus or devolve into majority rule.  The
difference between these two paths can be seen by examining the difference
between the Society of Friends (Quakers, American Friends) and every other
Protestant denomination in America.  There is a qualitative difference. 

Is Indymedia a social change group?  Didn't we grow out of the Anti-WTO 
protests in Seattle?  Are we going to loose courage and devolve into majority 
rule?

Reading postings to imc-process and new-imc lists I see repeated
misconceptions and arguments concerning consensus decision making.  Please 
read the Indymedia documents and other links.  The more the members of 
Indymedia understand consensus the more workable it will seem.

There are ligitimate concerns about consensus decisionmaking which we need to
come to grips with in our local IMCs and at Global.  However, Indymedia does
not need to devolve into majority rule in order to cope.  There are other
possible structures, consistent with consensus decision making, which can be
developed to cope with such things as disruptive individuals on working
groups, or in an imc.  In an earlier post I gave some of my ideas for doing
so.  If asked I will repeat them and my explaination that consensus isn't
about everybody agreeing.  Consensus is about diversity though, and that is
something that majority rule is not about.  Can we be a diverse organization?

Starhawk is one of the people referenced in the Indymedia documents.  Perhaps
she would be willing to work with Indymedia on this issue.

I'll continue to do my best to further understanding about consensus.