Inability of TAMI member forum to make decisions

Again after members meeting yesterday (31/10), a lot of hot air was released, but almost no point on the agenda list was checked and voted on.
We should either stop milling water, or start to make decisions at these assemblies.
Elseway it is just a waste of time and hope for changes.

You’ve run into the fundamental problem with flat, member run, organisations - coming to a decision is difficult and on on contentious issues near impossible.

What decision making structure do you propose? Straight majority vote? Consensus with objection period? Two thirds majority? Elect a committee and let them make decisions? They’ve all got advantages and drawbacks

I propose a majority vote on urgent topics, like abuse of TAMI, 2/3 majority on big decisions. On monetary matters we already have a sort of committee, I don’t understand why it cannot work on other topics, like administration and support matters.
For example, look how hard it is for TAMI to cancel a movie night, though 90% of the members agree it should be cancelled.

You are correct, but

  1. Nobody stopped you, or anybody else, from insisting on proper procedure (there were a couple of whispers during the meeting to do this but apparently nobody felt strongly about it)

  2. I think there were no objections to any of the important infrastructure improvements like fixing the electrical problems, also replacing the broken entrance door by a secure (metal) door + electronic lock + way to see outside, so people cannot break in at night

  3. Even a 100% vote on anything is not possible, since there are people who cannot come, not because they don’t care but because of other issues (stuff at work); there were at least 2 people who called to say they couldn’t make it.

The last problem is not as bad as it sounds in terms of making decisions impossible, since the amount of critical decisions is not that much right now (this could change but we are lucky so far)

Regardless of the specific issue at hand, I’m for either a regular or a 2/3 majority, where those who abstain don’t count.

‫בתאריך שבת, 2 בנוב׳ 2019 ב-0:45 מאת ‪test2 via T.A.M.I.‬‏ <‪noreply@discourse.telavivmakers.org‬‏>:‬

1 Like

I am in favor of consensus decision making (not this majority stuff- this is not a government committee). People are free to abstain or not participate, of course, if that is their wish.

I’m in favour of consensus decision making, but within a limited time-frame to avoid stagnation.
Let’s assume the vast majority of decision can be made by a consensus reached within X amount of time.
Every creative effort should be made towards reaching the consensus.

The decisions that don’t reach a consensus within the set amount of time, would reach a majority vote, for good or bad, provided there’s a method given to measure the result.
So it’s not really about making a good decision that suit’ most people (acknowledging that a good decision can only be reached by consensus) but at least we’ll have some methodology for trial and error, to avoid the evil of stagnation.
Taking into consideration that the result may indeed be bad, but the decision can be corrected if it does turn out to be bad in the long run ( but in the short term, the lesser evil vrs stagnation). The method to correct should also be provided before voting.

Liquid feedback is a tool used by the german pirate party to overcome problems
of democracy, as it is a feature of true democracy (power to the people and
not to a group or party) that it is quite a lot of time and work
needed to decide on
things like who is to take down the waste bins and who has to clean
the dishes and what to do if one does not clean up the milling machine
after use.

These tools can help



https://www.public-software-group.org/liquid_feedback

Cheers

Ludwig

+1, though this can “deteriorate” to plain voting when most items fail to reach consensus.

Would add the following:

  • Allowing members to partake remotely in decision making and actively soliciting member participation
  • Requiring at n hands on each item where n is greater than ?

Indeed,
Maybe the part of “every effort to achieve consensus”, should also be demonstrated by which & how many rounds of compromise were attempted before the time elapsed to avoid some sort of Filibuster that would force a vote.

Agree - especially if topics progress to voting stage. While at the consensus stage - perhaps we should make efforts or even have some sort of procedure to let the topic mature in the forum discussion before bringing it to an (anticipated) decision.

Not sure what you mean by:

Are you talking about a minimum number of voters? Not sure I understand.

I don’t see full consensus possible on every topic. This ideology bogs down important and urgent decisions.
On remote voting: we should first decide who will take part in voting: members, but not keyholders, or everyone who holds a key. At the moment there are also a number of people who aren’t really engaged in TAMI day-to-day activities, but they surely participate in decision making process. Is this something we want? A member who moved to live to US or EU and still has a voting power inside our tiny community, being completely detached from it?

I also do not understand what is the problem in plain voting. We strive to bring democracy everywhere in the world, except TAMI. It sometimes feels like “full consensus” is a certain status quo we uphold, just to not change things (which can certainly be comfortable for some).
Usually resistance to voting is a sign of higher hierarchy, avoiding change in the organisation.

There was never a problem with voting. in the meeting people disagreed about the points that they were voting on which is something else.

just as for example. if i want to do something in Tami i get a majority even before the meetings so i know even if it’s worth being raised. also full consensus was never a requirement for a lot of things in Tami (SIGs). just those that effect all or most members or changes some underline fundamentals (keys, responsibilities moniez and so on) and even then i think a “don’t obstruct” is more of what is happening in Tami untill now more then full agreement.

1 Like

Not sure if anyone was actually disappointed with the meeting or that not enough got done. People were mostly on the same page, and we got to hear different opinions too. TAMI may not even be open in two months, but if there is a super urgent controversial decision that needs to be made by yesterday then I would happy to help fix it.

It is a fundamental misapprehension that there is some kind of ruling TAMI body with the power to dictate what anyone can do. Who is even on it?

Don’t forget, we are nothing but a group of friends with a common vision, and anybody is welcome to come and participate.

If someone is obstructing other people or making a mess for others then they are bad because they don’t care about their friends, not because of some rule that a hypothetical TAMI politician voted on.

2 Likes

there are two thing that are in dispute:

cameras with encryption vs. extreme privacy.

movie night: basically shutting down the place for an activity almost no-one attends, and has little to do with what the space is for.

1 Like

I thought the super urgent decision was more like do we close TAMI or not (and moving it out of Tel Aviv is equivalent to shooting it in the head), but so far everyone wants it to continue existing.

As for your other questions, I do not think there was any critical emergency, but I can summarize what is going on after talking to a few people (not everybody though):

  1. The business with the cameras is both “politically” controversial, in the sense that if you very simply ask people then about half reply that they are in favor of “cameras with encryption” and half reply that they are in favor of “extreme privacy” (interestingly, neither of the people saying the one thing or the other are optimistic that the cameras will solve any problems at all. For example, it was mentioned that we know anyway who broke the band saw, and several similar stories), and also few or none of those people have a real understanding of the technical or legal or cultural issues involved, so it was more like abstract opinions from people, which is ok at this stage.

What does seem to require an decision is how to fix the door. It was agreed that a non-broken door will stop most people from simply breaking in at night and stealing stuff, and also people inside will be able to see who is standing outside the door (this could be through a camera but also a peephole) before having to open it. What was absolutely not agreed was: replace the broken door + frame with a metal or metal-core door, or cut a door into the existing outer metal shutter. Or other options as well, eg imagine modifying the outer door with a simple magnetic lock plus a way to see outside, but then would users in wheelchairs be able to open it, etc.

  1. TAMI does, unfortunately, not yet have a critical mass of events to conflict with each other, so trying to decide whether to kick out the biolab lectures or the movie night or the arduino workshop is ridiculous. To the extent that there is a dispute, right now anybody has the right to schedule an event at a certain time unless someone else grabbed that time first, and we can only pray that one day it will be crowded enough so that we have to pick and choose in favor of popularity. For now we are proud to host all the non-conformists, maybe they are what the space is for :slight_smile:

On cameras: it is not correct to say “half-half”, we never voted on the matter, only discussed it.

On knowing who broke band saw: knowing Telegram nicknames of people is not the same as knowing their faces and taking proper precautions and explanation.

On moving: physical TAMI anywhere is better than no TAMI or foreclosed TAMI or virtual TAMI (like some proposed).

On door concerns: as a person who did it for money, if someone wants to break in, he will do it in 10 minutes. No changing locks/doors/frames will help. Only a working camera.

A camera can see someone puting explosives to a bus station or killing people in the mall by just gunning them down.
But it can never ever stop something from happening.
Try it, steal some beer in a 24/7 shop, just kidding😃

If the place has to be dark to screen the movie, and working with power tool is banned, this is not only closing TAMI for other events, but also closing TAMI for regular making.

‫בתאריך יום ג׳, 5 בנוב׳ 2019 ב-3:55 מאת ‪test2 via T.A.M.I.‬‏ <‪noreply@discourse.telavivmakers.org‬‏>:‬

אפשר לאמץ את את המודל שיש בעמותת המקור:

  • דיונים ברשימת התפוצה

  • הצבעה במפגש. אפשר להצביע באמצעות שליח.

שי