Did post in Bitches, Natter, and Previously.

Trudy - I don't think that many of us have been unhappy with consensus; I thought it worked. The more structured discussion and voting method just makes for a more focusey way of dealing with decisions. The comfort of structure.

I just posted in Canadians, LOTR and DueSouth.

My only problem with consensus is how many things got decided when I was asleep. Sometimes things got decided before I had a chance to offer any input.

I've just caught up on the discussion and am wondering if the anti-concensus feeling is half a dozen people who happen to be around at the time.

I know that sounds snarky and circular.

Personally, I think the vast majority of the time we have reached valid concensus. I know if I come into a discussion and my side is being expressed adequately I don't necessarily chime in. I think if a movie thread didn't have enough people supporting it (placing aside technical concerns for the moment) it would peter out and die. Finally, maybe we just haven't reached a critical mass of sentiment on a political thread. Again from my POV, I can't make up my mind whether I'd like one or not. I see strong reasons for both and think the discussion isn't over yet.

I also think that a) people who want to influence the decisions include themselves in the decision process and b) there is nothing barring ANYBODY from participating in that process.

The process has largely served us well and (again, IMHO) is a part of the spirit of the place. Finding a way to reach out and let people know that they belong in it could eliminate the problems we've had.

Nothing's been decided that bothered me, but there are definitely times when the discussion is leaning heavily one direction, then you come back a few hours later and things have swung the opposite direction. I can see how in some circumstances this was upsetting.

I have posted in Buffy, Angel, Farscape, Clex, Literary, Music, Un-American.

The only threads still need to be posted in that I know of are Sang Sacre and Movies, neither of which I have ever been in, so I wold prefer a resident post.

Thanks all, and off to bed.

Trudy:

My problem is what David said, plus, additionally: we never know when to end a discussion and make a decision, so people leave (this would make a decide in a fairly timely fashion) and people can bring the same stuff (movies thread) up over and over until there is a consensus of the people on the board that day.

Also: it sounds like the problem might be the haste with which certain decisions have been made (thereby leaving some folks out).

Well, maybe the problem is the time frame-- discussions are too long or too short.

I've just caught up on the discussion and am wondering if the anti-concensus feeling is half a dozen people who happen to be around at the time.

It could well be. I confess that I don't think we've had any real problames withactual decisions reached. (With the movie thread issue, I got the impression that was reopened and a different decision reached because it was decided something would be done for the Foamies anyway; so there was at least a trigger for reopening it.)

In any case, with this vote we'll hopefully get a more complete picture here. If it gets voted down, then that's good evidence that there's a broad consensus in favour of the broad consensus model.

Trudy, if it is a small bunch of people with the anti-issue, it'll come out in the vote, and what's the loss?

a) people who want to influence the decisions include themselves in the decision process and b) there is nothing barring ANYBODY from participating in that process.

Honestly, by the third time something I was against comes up, I bow out because I feel like a harpy. Which is also what I feel like when I'm agitating for something I'm pro.

The current process exhausts me, and I'm glad that I'm being given a clear opportunity to say so.

I don't think consensus is definitive of us, not at all. It's more complicated than that.