Re: [WDDM] Re: decisions at wider levels

["Bernard Clayson" <bernard-clayson(at)shuartfarm.fsnet.co.uk>]

Bruce,

The best systems grow from simple beginnings, all that is needed is a few simple procedures of debate and decision.

From that, things can grow according to need.

Trying to construct an organisation from a standing start is fraught with complications, not least of which is do the members want one, and that leads back to my question of a couple of years ago i.e. organisation ..... or an association of people with guts enough to challenge the existing system.

How many members actually want an organisation?

Regards

Bernard

----- Original Message -----

From: Bruce Eggum

To: wddm@world-wide-democracy.net

Sent: Saturday, December 30, 2006 2:19 AM

Subject: Re: [WDDM] Re: [WDDM] Re: decisions at wider levels

I agree Bernard, that is why a structure is needed (charter, constitution) to provide safegards, control power, methods to communicate, resolve issues and consider all persons input. With no method to dertermine what consensus exists, nothing can be accomplished and breeds dictorial rule.

Bruce Eggum

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: "Bernard Clayson" < bernard-clayson(at)shuartfarm.fsnet.co.uk>
To: <wddm@world-wide-democracy.net>
Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2006 14:49:31 -0000
Subject: Re: [WDDM] Re: decisions at wider levels
WDDM is an internet community, and the same problems occur in government, and
local communities i.e.
How does one know whether there is a consensus without the means/method of
individuals declaring approval .... or objection?

More important, what means/method is proposed to address the concerns of
individuals in order to reach a consensus?

Regards
Bernard