[New-imc] Ithacan consensus

[Sarsnic at aol.com]

Arc, Eric,
Many people across the network are trying to explain to you in a variety of ways that consensus as defined in the Principles of Unity, and as practiced and understood across the IMC network has more correlation to the concepts of trust, support, autonomy and creativity than to any opposition to 2/3 fall back positions.  So many of us assume that any local collective which has considered it's options and made a decision about this deserves our support.  If Rogue or Perth or anyone believes that the best way to create trust, support and creativity, and their best interpretation of the Principles of Unity is to use 2/3 fall back positions, then many of us support them.  It is ridiculous to have two or three guys in Ithaca think otherwise and feel they can impose a block, especially because there is absolutely no consistency in this as so many IMCs on the cities list have various sorts of fallback positions.  As I have explained before, under your interpretation of block, if a few guys in Ithaca decide to categorically block all new IMC applicants which have 2/3 fallbacks, and a couple of us in Houston decide to categorically block all IMCs which don't have 2/3 fallbacks, we could forever stop all new IMCs from joining the cities list. Please stop imposing your interpretation of the Principles of Unity on others, because there are other interpretations and because we need to empower each other.  You are not contributing anything constructive, and your obstinancy is leading so many people to conclude that you don't want to help any other IMCs at all, but just want to be "right."  You continualy decry others for wanting to set aside blocks whenever it is convenient, and don't realize that far from ignoring your block, many people have come out to tell you exactly why your block does not go to the principles of the IMC and therefore must be set aside.
Peace
Nick