Hi Toby,
A *single* person can't prolong the
decision-making process forever,
because we have enough people around that lack of a single person
is no obstacle to reaching a consensus. Consensus != unanimity
(in English, although apparently it does mean that in French --
see some earlier posts between me and Anthere).
And even with a voting mechanism in place, a single
dedicated person
could still prolong *discourse* forever. Or would you censor speech?
No, but in a voting process, the discourse period can be time-limited. Of
course, people could continue to discuss the issue on a dedicated page, but an
enforcable decision could be made before that.
And I'm
afraid that when people get tired of our tedious
decision making process, they will want to resort to more drastic forms
of
>enforcement and more permanent power structures, which will in turn lead
>to wrong decisions, alienation, power struggles.
Agreed, but IMO, that's exactly what *you* are
trying to do ^_^.
Not at all, the idea is to decentralize power, and thereby reduce the
potential for abuse. Voting seems to me very much complementary to the wiki idea.
Regards,
Erik
--
+++ GMX - Mail, Messaging & more
http://www.gmx.net +++
NEU: Mit GMX ins Internet. Rund um die Uhr für 1 ct/ Min. surfen!