> Thiago Oppermann wrote:
>> On 1/6/2003 3:51 PM, "lbo-talk-request at lbo-talk.org"
>> <lbo-talk-request at lbo-talk.org> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Yes, a block is like having veto power, but you can't block stuff just
>>> for the hell of it.
>
>> Who decides what a spurious veto is?
>
> The group decides.
>
> For example:
>
> "I just don't like this proposal" is an example of an invalid block.
But if the group decides, then are vetos involved in that? Or do they decide by a method other than consensus?
And why, exactly is "I just don't like this proposal" invalid? What if someone has reasons of their own for not telling the group why they object to a measure? Isn't that their prerogative? Shouldn't you trust that if someone in your group doesn't like a proposal, there is some sort of reason involved? Why would they have to spill the beans on their private affairs? Why demand the truth from them? In my view, a meeting should be a place where decisions rather than confessionals are made.
My own experience of consensus decision making is that it falls apart on trivial matters like setting times for meetings (where I think the solution is to appoint a dictator randomly) and in really serious matters which polarize the group (where various forms of majority and preference counting should be considered.) Insisting on it as a form of political education isn't a good idea in my view, since it is an artificial device constructed for a particular sort of decision - the ones where everyone has more or less the same stake.
Thiago