Especially this wiki page https://noisebridge.net/wiki/Consensus#Consensus_at_Noisebridge and https://noisebridge.net/wiki/More_Consensus_Info describes the process of "Consensus". Of course https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consensus_decision-making is a great resource. To start with, using time-restricted slots for discussions on a topic will stop us from wasting time. When there are groups/individuals who do not reach a conclusion and are directly affected, they should further discuss it separately and come up with proposals at the next assembly. When the assembly consents on a topic individuals should accept it and act in accordance with it. They can always put it on the agenda for the next assembly if they have a new proposal. We should start creating pages for meetings, writing down the minutes and action items. Also the agenda should be available in advance. We have to fix the "model" of remote participation in G.A. I do agree that voting is not the best way for decision making. The tool of liquid democracy Thraros has been working on can be tested and why not adopted :) From: neeuqii@gmail.com Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2014 19:13:47 +0200 To: hack66@hackerspace.gr Subject: [#hack66] The Meat: Beer Assembly Structure So, I was thinking yesterday that it would be a good idea to communicate a system that will guide our weekly assemblies :] I find this stuff is the most important & the most exciting. I've worked with Open Space & different types of Consensus Processes before & I know from experience that this is the real test. Once we have it down, hack66 & its projects will start to fly. The best guide I could find for this in a hurry is the one of Noisebridge, which I know Thrasos will appreciate: https://noisebridge.net/wiki/Meeting Take a look, C. _______________________________________________ hack66 mailing list http://lists.hackerspace.gr/listinfo/hack66