[Prev] [Next]   [Index]   [Thread Index]

02497: RE: [WDDM] sociopathic process

From: Joseph Hammer <parrhesiajoe(at)gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 00:19:56 -0800
Subject: RE: [WDDM] sociopathic process

When I read this,

After the April 10 deadline, all the applications obtained will be sent to all the other applicants, who all would be asked to review/accept/reject them. You will th…

it seems to be pertaining to an actual membership application process… Like, Mr. Bill wants to be a member… does anyone object? Are you saying that this principle extends beyond membership into the initiative process, with membership being an example of this wider principle? Is there an 80%/100% consensus rule proposed or adopted, and where can I read about it?

And what is sociopathic process? I’m not familiar with the term.

Thanks J

Just your average Par

From: Bruce Eggum [bruce.eggum(at)gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, December 14, 2009 8:03 PM
To: wddm@world-wide-democracy.net
Subject: Re: [WDDM] sociopathic process


Par, Merick wrote about it using the "membership" as example.

It is sociopathic, but adds the 80% level.

This could be used in any consensus which did not make 100%. Members could request a democratic vote on those initiatives. It is in amongst the writing on the linked page.


After the April 10 deadline, all the applications obtained will be sent to all the other applicants, who all would be asked to review/accept/reject them. You will then sent your comments back to the webmaster who would tabulate the results. If you would be happy with all the other applicants, you do not have to do anything at that point, although a confirmation that you reviewed the other applications and have no objections, would be useful. Otherwise, e-mail back also your suggestions for the consensus level needed to accept or reject somebody's application. Actually, anybody is invited to do this, even separately from the application process, at any time. What do you think about this initial proposal: an application will be accepted if not more than 20% of others send any objection to it (an 80% approval consensus level)? In any case, if any objections to somebody's application would be raised, they would be all again collected and resent to all the other applicants for further comments, perhaps even several times, until a comfortable consensus on this application is achieved.In a similar way, one would proceed with later membership applications, using the rules/procedures established in this initial phase, and possibly modified based on all the experience accumulated.
Bruce Eggum



On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 9:29 PM, <Joseph Hammer> wrote:

Love it!


Where is the 80% thing? I might be overlooking it. I also couldn't find "sociopathic process" anywhere.


I take the first link, and then where do I read about it?

Par


On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 1:00 PM, <Bruce Eggum> wrote:

My bad, it has been so long, I forgot to mention the adopted process.

The “sociopathic process” was adopted with provisions some time ago.

 http://www.world-wide-democracy.net/archive/proposals0/wddm_index_march28.html#prop

Please note the 80% of people agreeing with an initiative. If an initiative does not pull 100% consensus, an initiative could be presented requesting a vote on the matter. If over 80% agree with the initiative it would be confirmed. This procedure I believe was adopted with no objection in 2005.

Obviously, there are times when conservative/liberal/other views clash and no consensus can be determined. Using the above stipulation resolves this problem.

This provides a democratic way of coming to decisions.

I realize I often use the terms initiative and binding referendum. Initiative is a proposal written up and presented to the community or organization. Binding referendum is the voting process used to adopt an initiative. I use these words as descriptive of the process we are using. I am not trying to change any policy or procedure, simply using terms I believe we are familiar with.

We must now develop actual By-Laws and procedures for WDDM. We cannot gain accreditation without it. WDDM has applied for non-profit status and we need to continue this process.

There is a very good site with information in this regard here:   http://rss.suite101.com/nonprofitmanagement.xml Please review this and write up drafts for our By-Laws.

Bruce Eggum
Gresham Wisconsin, USA
Health Care http://tinyurl.com/ycx9vpz
http://usinitiative.com
http://vote.org/




[Prev] [Next]   [Index]   [Thread Index]