Rules and Processes for our use of Loomio
Danyl Strype
Public
Seen by 358
Craig raised a good question in the Drug Policy thead about how a consensus in Loomio makes its way into formal policy. This raises a wider issue about exactly how Loomio is used in our party-wide decision-making processes.
Rob Ueberfeldt Mon 10 Feb 2014 12:55AM
Sounds reasonable. What signifies the 'main group'.
And how do we get the main group to vote? Traditionally this would be at an AGM or snail mail, should we embrace email voting from the members?
Craig Magee Mon 10 Feb 2014 1:18AM
I never wanted Loomio to have any power over the board and still don't.
The board consists of democratically elected representatives, using a Condorcet method. That's heaps of democracy. Boards are universally despised and accused of slowing things down, because they do. The swiftness of Loomio allows violent reactions and inappropriate or pop responses. Loomio must never be given power, ever.
Where Loomio can shine is member engagement. The policy group should be considered a think tank. The people on Loomio are the same people who will be running in and voting in any board election, likely involving platforms championing and sponsoring policies.
The transition from Loomio to policy will involve enough board members brokering and voting it through. There is still room for speedy reaction if the board happen to agree with the idea, without letting mob rule running the show.
Danyl Strype Mon 10 Feb 2014 1:20AM
What signifies the ‘main group’.
The part of Loomio which isn't one of the subgroups, ie the part of Loomio that this discussion is taking place in.
Adam Bullen Mon 10 Feb 2014 1:23AM
I like the ideal of liquid democracy and I am very interested in how it works in practice.
If Loomio turns out to be a good platform for such a system (which it seems likely).
I think we need to establish some rules about how a decision being discussed and voted on in Loomio, such as how many members voting on an issue constitutes a fair representation of the members, etc...
Hubat McJuhes Mon 10 Feb 2014 8:38AM
@strypey I have a couple of questions:
- What does MMORPG stand for?
- Am I right with the assumption that every member that registers for the main group also becomes a member of the policy group? If not: why not?
- Am I right that all contents in the main group is visible to the public, i.e. without the need of a loomeo account?
- What is the visibility of the policy group?
- What is the default visibility to subgroups?
Hubat McJuhes Mon 10 Feb 2014 8:52AM
@adam I don't think that the loomeo developers have any intention to drive loomeo towards a liquid democracy platform. There appear to be no plans to bring delegative voting into play or even only preferential voting.
I think that once we have reached a certain number of participants we will have to move to a different platform. Liquid Feedback would be my current favourite.
Hubat McJuhes Mon 10 Feb 2014 9:12AM
@craigmagee I am not sure if an online platform can be given the ultimate power at a future point in time or not, but I am pretty certain that you and I have different opinions about the role of the board.
I see the need to organise the decision making process in the PP as a bottom-up process. Everyone needs to be able to be influential in the areas of expertise immediately when engaging the party. The degree of influence should rise with the reputation one earns. In real time. Liquid.
The board - as a long term work force - shall serve the party in catering for a fertile environment for this to happen - and otherwise step back.
That said it becomes obvious that I don't want the board to have the last say in all things policy. I could reluctantly discuss something like a veto right; but I cannot accept the board as a political power center.
This makes clear that all binding political decisions in my point of view must be done by a member meeting.
Rob Ueberfeldt Mon 10 Feb 2014 9:17PM
As far as I know everything is visible to the public.
MMORPG = monthly membership online real time public gathering.
Don't know how policy subgroup membership works.
https://www.facebook.com/events/281699551980782/?fref=ts
Craig Magee Mon 10 Feb 2014 9:37PM
Members engaging on Loomio and electing representatives to the board is bottom-up. The only reason it's working top down now is because the number of members involved with internal-process is roughly the same as the number of board and officer positions.
I have personally pushed for MMORPGs to work, supported the implementation of Loomio, did what I could to keep the CiviCRM progressing.
The board members are not servants subject to the whim of popular majority on every issue. They are the people that do the work and do it out of their personal reasons.
If the board are to be treated as employee by the membership base you need to go find some more members, ones willing to pay the board as employers.
Danyl Strype · Mon 10 Feb 2014 12:48AM
When it comes to subgroups like the Policy Group, I would say that whatever decisions they come to consensus on needs to be put to the full membership via the main group before it is considered a Party decision.
At this point, my understanding is that we are in a sort of trial mode, where any decisions made in Loomio - including the Main group - must be accepted by the Board (and/or an MMORPG) before they are formalized. Once the membership get to grips with using Loomio, and we get our trainer wheels off, is may be appropriate to say that any proposal which gets consensus in Loomio is a Party decision, which would mean in theory that Board decisions could be over-ruled by the membership via Loomio.