833 lines
91 KiB
JSON
833 lines
91 KiB
JSON
{
|
||
"_comment": "Create flow — decision approaches (Figma Flow — Right Rail `20523:23509`)",
|
||
"sidebar": {
|
||
"title": "How does your group decide, for small things and for big ones?",
|
||
"descriptionBefore": "Pick a card for each kind of decision. Decision speeds sorts every decision and sends it to the right card, and each card’s scope says which decisions it governs. Combine cards, change their words or ",
|
||
"descriptionLinkLabel": "add",
|
||
"descriptionAfter": " your own. The list below names the decisions every Rule should cover, so each one has a card."
|
||
},
|
||
"messageBox": {
|
||
"title": "Make sure your Rule covers each of these",
|
||
"items": [
|
||
{
|
||
"id": "everyday",
|
||
"label": "Everyday decisions"
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"id": "big",
|
||
"label": "Big decisions"
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"id": "amend",
|
||
"label": "Changing this Rule"
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"id": "emergency",
|
||
"label": "Emergencies"
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"id": "finances",
|
||
"label": "Shared money"
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"id": "spending",
|
||
"label": "Spending"
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"id": "roles",
|
||
"label": "Roles and working groups"
|
||
}
|
||
]
|
||
},
|
||
"cardStack": {
|
||
"toggleSeeAll": "See all decision cards",
|
||
"toggleShowLess": "Show less",
|
||
"expandedStackDescriptionBefore": "You can also ",
|
||
"expandedStackDescriptionAfter": " your own decision card."
|
||
},
|
||
"confirmModal": {
|
||
"title": "Confirm selection",
|
||
"description": "Confirm to select this option.",
|
||
"nextButtonText": "Confirm"
|
||
},
|
||
"addApproach": {
|
||
"nextButtonText": "Add card"
|
||
},
|
||
"removeApproach": {
|
||
"nextButtonText": "Remove"
|
||
},
|
||
"sectionHeadings": {
|
||
"corePrinciple": "Core principle",
|
||
"applicableScope": "Applicable scope",
|
||
"stepByStepInstructions": "Step-by-step instructions",
|
||
"consensusLevel": "Consensus level",
|
||
"objectionsDeadlocks": "Objections and deadlocks"
|
||
},
|
||
"consensusLevelDisplay": {
|
||
"supermajorityShare": "Our supermajority share",
|
||
"noSetShare": "No set share"
|
||
},
|
||
"scopeAddButtonLabel": "Add a scope",
|
||
"defaultScopeChips": [
|
||
"Changing the Rule",
|
||
"Money",
|
||
"Projects",
|
||
"Asking someone to leave"
|
||
],
|
||
"methods": [
|
||
{
|
||
"id": "decision-speeds",
|
||
"label": "Decision speeds",
|
||
"supportText": "We sort each decision by how hard it is to undo and who it touches, then use the speed that fits.",
|
||
"sections": {
|
||
"corePrinciple": "Most choices do not need a meeting, and a few need all of us. Before we pick a method, we sort the decision with two questions. How hard is it to undo, and who does it touch? The harder it is to undo and the wider it reaches, the more voices it gets. Sorting pulls against habit, since a group used to deciding everything together has to let small things go. It breaks when people call their own decisions small to avoid asking.",
|
||
"applicableScope": [
|
||
"Everyday decisions",
|
||
"Sorting decisions",
|
||
"Small spending"
|
||
],
|
||
"consensusLevel": 0,
|
||
"stepByStepInstructions": "Just do it covers what is easy to undo and touches only your own work. Act without asking. Do it and tell covers what is easy to undo but touches others. Act, then tell the people it touches. Ask first covers what is hard to undo but stays inside your own area. Post your plan where every member will see it and wait three days for concerns. Decide together covers what is hard to undo and touches everyone, such as a lease, a hire, pay, a grant, the rules for joining or this Rule. That is a decision of the whole group. Each other method in our Rule governs the decisions its scope names.",
|
||
"objectionsDeadlocks": "When unsure, or when two methods could apply, we use the one that needs more of us. A member who thinks a decision went too fast says so where every member will see it, and it moves up. An ask first concern still open after a week becomes a decision of the whole group. Spending over $50 needs one other member’s written agreement, and over $500 is decide together. With no time to sort, anyone acts to keep people safe and tells every member within a day."
|
||
}
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"id": "lazy-consensus",
|
||
"label": "Lazy consensus",
|
||
"supportText": "A proposal passes when no member objects before its deadline, with longer deadlines for bigger changes.",
|
||
"sections": {
|
||
"corePrinciple": "We keep work moving by treating silence as consent, and we earn that silence by making sure every member sees every proposal. Any active member can propose, and any active member can stop a proposal with a concern. Short deadlines suit routine work and long ones suit decisions that are hard to undo. Silence is not agreement when people are away or unheard, so this breaks if proposals go where some members never look.",
|
||
"applicableScope": [
|
||
"Big decisions",
|
||
"Changing this Rule",
|
||
"Who can be a member",
|
||
"Spending over $500"
|
||
],
|
||
"consensusLevel": 100,
|
||
"stepByStepInstructions": "Any active member posts a proposal where every member will see it, saying what would change, who will do it and the deadline. Routine proposals get at least three days. A change to this Rule or to who can be a member, or spending over $500, gets at least fifteen days and is raised at the next meeting too. Support is welcome but not needed. If the deadline passes with no concern still standing, the proposal passes and goes into our records. Deadlines skip holidays and any closed weeks we keep, and a member who will be away can ask for one more week.",
|
||
"objectionsDeadlocks": "Any active member can raise a concern before the deadline. The proposer talks with them, can change the proposal and restarts the clock once. If a concern still stands after two weeks of real effort, two members outside the disagreement, or any two if we are too few, confirm that in writing and call a vote. It then passes only with our supermajority share of the active members who vote, if our quorum votes. A failed proposal waits three months to return unless it has changed."
|
||
}
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"id": "modified-consensus",
|
||
"label": "Modified consensus",
|
||
"supportText": "We aim for full agreement, and if a concern still stands after two rounds or two weeks, we vote.",
|
||
"sections": {
|
||
"corePrinciple": "We prefer full agreement and refuse to be stuck without it. Every proposal starts as a search for something every member can live with. If that fails, a fallback vote lets us move while the minority’s view stays on record. The vote pulls against our wish to bring everyone along, so we use it only after real effort. This breaks when the fallback becomes the plan and nobody tries for agreement first.",
|
||
"applicableScope": [
|
||
"Big decisions",
|
||
"Policies",
|
||
"Changing this Rule"
|
||
],
|
||
"stepByStepInstructions": "A member shares a written proposal where every member will see it at least three days before the meeting. The group takes clarifying questions, hears concerns and amends the proposal. The facilitator asks whether any active member stands aside, which means they will not help but will not stop it, or blocks, which means they believe it would harm the group. With no block the proposal passes. If a block still stands, the group tries a second round at the next meeting or within two weeks. If it still stands after two rounds or two weeks, the proposal goes to a vote. It passes with our supermajority share of the active members who vote, if our quorum votes.",
|
||
"objectionsDeadlocks": "Before the vote, members who disagree say why, and their view goes into our records with the result. A proposal that fails the vote waits three months before it returns, unless it has changed. Members on leave do not count toward the half who must vote. A decision passed by the fallback vote is reviewed after six months. When a matter cannot wait, a member may act alone only to prevent immediate harm. They tell every member within 24 hours, and the action lapses after 14 days unless the group confirms it."
|
||
}
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"id": "weighted-voting",
|
||
"label": "Weighted voting",
|
||
"supportText": "Votes count in proportion to a recorded stake, such as shares, tokens or hours worked, on a record every member sees.",
|
||
"sections": {
|
||
"corePrinciple": "Some groups give more say to members who carry more of the risk or the work, as companies do with shares and many DAOs do with tokens. If we weight votes, we say exactly what earns weight and keep the record open to every member. Weighted voting pulls against equal say, so the biggest decisions also need a majority of members counted one each. It breaks when weight piles up with a few holders who can outvote everyone else.",
|
||
"applicableScope": [
|
||
"Owner or shareholder decisions",
|
||
"Token votes",
|
||
"Big decisions"
|
||
],
|
||
"consensusLevel": 51,
|
||
"stepByStepInstructions": "Our Rule says what earns weight, such as shares owned, tokens held or hours of recorded work, and how often the record is updated. Every member can see the record. A proposal is shared where every member will see it at least a week before the vote. It passes with more than half of the weight cast, if holders of half of all weight take part, or a tenth when over a hundred members hold weight. Changing this Rule, changing how weight is earned or closing the group needs our supermajority share of the weight cast and of the members who vote, counted one each. Results go into our records with the weight behind each side.",
|
||
"objectionsDeadlocks": "Any member can question the weight record before a vote, and the vote waits until two members who are not part of the dispute have checked it. A passed proposal waits two days before it takes effect, so members who strongly disagree can ask for it to be reconsidered, or leave with what our Rule says they are owed. Members with little weight can still bring proposals. If our Rule caps the weight one member can hold, weight above the cap does not count."
|
||
}
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"id": "general-meeting",
|
||
"label": "General meeting",
|
||
"supportText": "Every member is called to a meeting at least once a year to make big decisions, elect roles and hear reports.",
|
||
"sections": {
|
||
"corePrinciple": "The members are the highest authority in this group. Once a year, and whenever enough members ask, we all meet to make the decisions that bind everyone, choose who holds our largest roles and hear how they used the power we gave them. Many co-op and nonprofit bylaws require this meeting. Gathering everyone costs time, and it breaks when it becomes a ritual that approves what a few people decided beforehand.",
|
||
"applicableScope": [
|
||
"Big decisions",
|
||
"Elections",
|
||
"Yearly reports",
|
||
"Changing this Rule"
|
||
],
|
||
"consensusLevel": 51,
|
||
"stepByStepInstructions": "We hold a general meeting at least once a year. Every member gets the date, the agenda and every written proposal at least fifteen days ahead, where every member will see it. Any member can add an item until a week before. The meeting needs our quorum taking part, in person, by video or in writing. A facilitator who holds no other role runs it. It decides by our other method for big decisions, or if there is none, by more than half of the active members who vote. Role holders report on their work and on shared money. Minutes go into our records within a week.",
|
||
"objectionsDeadlocks": "A tenth of active members can call a special general meeting by signing a request, and it is held within a month. If too few members take part, the meeting is held again within a month and then needs only half as many members as before. Decisions about one person are not debated at the meeting, which only hears that the right circle made them. The meeting can overturn any decision of a role holder or working group, except a safety decision made under our conflict process."
|
||
}
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"id": "hierarchical-decision-making",
|
||
"label": "Hierarchical decision-making",
|
||
"supportText": "An owner or director decides, managers decide within their areas, and every worker has a written way to raise concerns.",
|
||
"sections": {
|
||
"corePrinciple": "In an owner-run business, decisions flow from the owner through managers to the work. That can be clear and fast, and it puts power with people the workers did not choose. If we work this way, we say so plainly. Each manager’s authority has written limits, every worker can see who decides what, and there is a way to raise a concern that skips the chain. It breaks when the chain becomes the only way to be heard.",
|
||
"applicableScope": [
|
||
"Owner-run businesses",
|
||
"Managers’ areas",
|
||
"Raising concerns at work"
|
||
],
|
||
"consensusLevel": 0,
|
||
"stepByStepInstructions": "The owner or director writes down who decides what, from the owner to each manager, and shares it with every worker. A manager decides inside their area and their budget. A worker who has an idea or a problem takes it to their manager, who answers within a week. A decision above a manager’s limits goes up one level, and the worker hears the answer and the reason. Once a year every worker can say in writing, without their name if they choose, what is working and what is not, and the owner answers every point.",
|
||
"objectionsDeadlocks": "A worker who thinks a manager’s decision is unfair can take it to the next level up, or to a person outside the chain whom the owner names for this, unless our Rule names another route. Complaints of harassment or discrimination go to our written procedure for them, never through the person complained about. Nobody loses pay, shifts or their job for raising a concern in good faith. If workers come to own the business, the members replace this arrangement as a decision of the whole group."
|
||
}
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"id": "one-person-decides",
|
||
"label": "One person decides",
|
||
"supportText": "One named person decides for now, within written limits, until a set point when the group switches to shared decisions.",
|
||
"sections": {
|
||
"corePrinciple": "Someone has to decide while a group is one person or just starting, and pretending otherwise hides power. We name that person, write down what they decide and set the point where it ends. One person deciding is fast and clear. It pulls against shared ownership, so it is a stage and not a structure. It breaks when the end keeps slipping or the founder’s habits become everyone’s unwritten rules.",
|
||
"applicableScope": [
|
||
"Big decisions",
|
||
"Everyday decisions",
|
||
"A founder alone"
|
||
],
|
||
"consensusLevel": 0,
|
||
"stepByStepInstructions": "We name the person who decides. They make the group’s decisions and keep a decision log in our records that every member can read, including every use of shared money. Before a decision that is hard to undo, they ask the people it affects for advice. This arrangement ends when the group has three active members, or three months after a second member joins, whichever comes first. Before it ends, a majority of active members chooses our method for big decisions, and the founder steps out of key roles for a season and speaks last in meetings. Once a second member joins, any other change to this Rule needs every active member to agree.",
|
||
"objectionsDeadlocks": "Any member can raise a concern in writing, and the person deciding answers in writing within a week. If the person deciding cannot or will not act, the active members decide together until a new arrangement is made. An owner who keeps deciding past the end point writes down, before any hire, what staff can see, question and appeal. A project that keeps one lead, as some open source projects do, holds a yearly review instead, where more than half of the active members who vote can end it."
|
||
}
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"id": "two-person-sign-off",
|
||
"label": "Two-person sign-off",
|
||
"supportText": "A second member checks and approves some actions first, such as code changes, payments or posts that speak for us.",
|
||
"sections": {
|
||
"corePrinciple": "Nobody acts alone on the things that are hardest to take back. For a short list of actions, a second member checks the work and agrees before it happens. A second pair of eyes catches mistakes, spreads knowledge and keeps any one person from holding all the power. It costs a little speed. It breaks when approval becomes a rubber stamp, or when only one person is ever allowed to approve.",
|
||
"applicableScope": [
|
||
"Code and document changes",
|
||
"Payments and contracts",
|
||
"Posts that speak for us"
|
||
],
|
||
"consensusLevel": 0,
|
||
"stepByStepInstructions": "These need sign-off unless our Rule lists others. Changes to shared code or key documents, payments over $50, contracts and posts that speak for the group. Payments over $500 are also a decision of the whole group. The member who wants to act shares the work with at least one other member who can approve that kind of action. That member checks it and says yes, asks for changes or says no. Nobody approves their own work. A shared account or wallet set to need several signers counts as sign-off. Each area keeps a list in our records of at least two members who can approve.",
|
||
"objectionsDeadlocks": "If the reviewer says no, the member can change the work and ask again, or ask a second reviewer. If two reviewers disagree, the matter goes to the working group for that area or, if there is none, to a decision of the whole group. A reviewer who does not answer within three days can be skipped for another. A member may make an urgent fix alone only to prevent immediate harm. They tell every member within 24 hours, and the fix gets its sign-off afterward or is undone within 14 days."
|
||
}
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"id": "shared-money",
|
||
"label": "Shared money",
|
||
"supportText": "Shared money sits where at least two members can act on it, and every member can read the books.",
|
||
"sections": {
|
||
"corePrinciple": "Money is where trust breaks first, so we write down where it is kept, who can act on it and who checks. Money held in one member’s name puts that member at risk and leaves the group exposed, so every account has more than one pair of hands on it. Members who cannot read the money do not govern it, so the books are open to every member. This breaks when one person holds every key.",
|
||
"applicableScope": [
|
||
"Shared money",
|
||
"Bank and payment accounts",
|
||
"Paying members back"
|
||
],
|
||
"consensusLevel": 0,
|
||
"stepByStepInstructions": "Shared money is kept in an account in the group’s name or with a fiscal sponsor, a nonprofit that holds money for groups. Until then, the member holding it keeps it apart from their own money and a second member can see every payment. At least two members can act on every account, and payments over $500 need two of them. Every payment goes into our records with its amount, date, purpose and who made it, with a receipt where there is one. Aid requests reach the group without a name.",
|
||
"objectionsDeadlocks": "Each month a member who did not spend checks the books against the account and posts a summary for every member, naming nobody who received aid. Any member can question a payment, and payments of that kind wait until two members have looked. Worries about misuse go to our conflict process, and nobody loses their place for raising one. Members are paid back within two weeks of showing a receipt. A group of one logs every payment in our records instead of asking a second member."
|
||
}
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"id": "spending-limits",
|
||
"label": "Spending limits",
|
||
"supportText": "Any member can spend up to $50 for the group’s work and up to $500 with one other member’s written agreement, and more than $500 is a decision of the whole group.",
|
||
"sections": {
|
||
"corePrinciple": "Small costs should not wait for a meeting and big ones should not happen without the group. Three limits let any member act on small things, two members act on larger ones and the whole group decide the rest. These limits suit a volunteer crew, and a group with paid staff or a yearly budget sets its own. The limits pull against speed, since anything over $500 waits for the group. They break when nobody writes spending down or one cost is split to stay under a limit.",
|
||
"applicableScope": [
|
||
"Spending the group’s money",
|
||
"Paying members back",
|
||
"Regular bills"
|
||
],
|
||
"consensusLevel": 0,
|
||
"stepByStepInstructions": "Any member can spend up to $50 of the group’s money for the group’s work without asking first. Up to $500 needs one other member’s written agreement before the money is spent, and a text or an email counts as written. More than $500 is a decision of the whole group. A cost the group has already approved, such as rent or another regular bill, needs no new decision each time it comes due. Costs for one purchase count together, so nobody splits a purchase to stay under a limit. Whoever spends writes the amount, the date, what it paid for and who agreed in our records, with a receipt where there is one. When the money helps a person, the request reaches the group without their name.",
|
||
"objectionsDeadlocks": "Any member can question a payment at the next meeting. When a limit was broken, the group decides whether the money is paid back. A cost up to $500 that no second member has agreed to waits until one does or until the next meeting."
|
||
}
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"id": "emergency-decisions",
|
||
"label": "Emergency decisions",
|
||
"supportText": "When waiting would cause harm, we act fast, tell every member within a day and confirm or undo it within two weeks.",
|
||
"sections": {
|
||
"corePrinciple": "Some decisions cannot wait for our usual process, and safety comes before procedure. In an emergency we let a few people act fast, and then the whole group takes the decision back. Emergency powers pull against our usual care and openness, so we keep them narrow, report them at once and let them lapse unless the group confirms them. An emergency that keeps coming back needs a regular process instead. A risk from one member’s conduct goes to our conflict process, never to a vote of every member.",
|
||
"applicableScope": [
|
||
"Emergencies",
|
||
"Threats to safety",
|
||
"Legal deadlines",
|
||
"Losing a space"
|
||
],
|
||
"stepByStepInstructions": "An emergency is a risk to someone’s safety, a legal threat, losing a space or a deadline we would otherwise miss. A legal threat or legal deadline goes first to the members who handle legal matters, who use these powers to protect it. If harm cannot wait for a vote, any member does the least that prevents it, and gets help from outside the group for immediate danger. Otherwise, any active member can call an emergency vote where every member will see it. It stays open 24 hours and passes with our supermajority share of the active members who vote, if at least two members and a quarter of active members vote. Spending over $500 needs that vote, or two members when safety cannot wait. Whoever acts tells every member within 24 hours.",
|
||
"objectionsDeadlocks": "Every emergency decision lapses after 14 days unless the group confirms it as a decision of the whole group. A proposal to confirm it made within the first week keeps it in force until that proposal is decided. If it lapses or the group says no, we undo what we can, and nobody is blamed for a good faith call. Emergency powers never extend anyone’s term, change this Rule or end a membership. Those wait for a decision of the whole group. If we use these powers more than three times a year, that situation gets a regular process."
|
||
}
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"id": "elected-board-of-directors",
|
||
"label": "Elected board of directors",
|
||
"supportText": "Members elect a board for set terms to make defined decisions between general meetings, and can recall any director.",
|
||
"sections": {
|
||
"corePrinciple": "When we are too many to decide everything together, we elect people to decide some things for us, and we keep the power to undo what they do. Directors serve the members. A board is not a boss so long as its powers are written down, its terms end and members can recall it. It breaks when the board approves whatever staff or founders bring it and members stop watching.",
|
||
"applicableScope": [
|
||
"Decisions between general meetings",
|
||
"Legal and money oversight",
|
||
"Hiring and managers"
|
||
],
|
||
"consensusLevel": 0,
|
||
"stepByStepInstructions": "Members elect directors at the general meeting for two-year terms, with half the seats up each year. Any active member can stand. Each member has one vote for each open seat, and the candidates with the most votes win, unless our Rule names another way to elect. The board decides what our bylaws and this Rule give it, and everything else goes to the members. It meets at least every three months, shares its agenda where every member will see it a week ahead and puts its minutes in our records within two weeks. Any member can attend, except for parts about one person’s private matters.",
|
||
"objectionsDeadlocks": "A director with a personal stake in a matter says so and does not vote on it. A tenth of active members can call a special general meeting to overturn a board decision or recall one director or the whole board, which takes more than half of the active members who vote. The board fills an empty seat until the next general meeting. Directors serve at most three terms in a row. In a small co-op every member can sit on the board."
|
||
}
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"id": "delegated-decision-making",
|
||
"label": "Delegated decision-making",
|
||
"supportText": "We hand defined decisions to a person or working group with a written mandate, a term, a report-back and a recall.",
|
||
"sections": {
|
||
"corePrinciple": "Roles are fine and bosses are not. A group gets bigger without a boss by handing pieces of its power to people and working groups, each with written edges. A role with no edges is a boss with no name. The people doing the work decide inside their area, and all of us can see what they decided and take the mandate back. This breaks when terms never end and nobody remembers who gave the mandate.",
|
||
"applicableScope": [
|
||
"Roles and working groups",
|
||
"Areas of work",
|
||
"Mandates and recall"
|
||
],
|
||
"consensusLevel": 0,
|
||
"stepByStepInstructions": "The group creates each role or working group as a decision of the whole group, with a written mandate in our records. The mandate names the aim, the area it decides, what it cannot decide, any budget, who holds it, who checks the work, a term of one year and a date to report back. Inside its area the role or working group decides without asking, by any method it agrees. It reports at least every three months on what it decided and what it spent. Anything outside the mandate or its budget, or affecting every member, is a decision of the whole group. Every role has a second person who can step in.",
|
||
"objectionsDeadlocks": "Any member can question a decision made under a mandate. If the role holder and the member cannot settle it, the group reviews it, and a good faith decision inside the mandate stands unless it is unsafe. When someone does not do what the mandate says, the steps grow in order, a reminder, then a conversation, then a change of role. The group can end any mandate at any time as a decision of the whole group. Mandates lapse at the end of their term unless the group renews them."
|
||
}
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"id": "changing-this-rule",
|
||
"label": "Changing this Rule",
|
||
"supportText": "Any member can propose a change to this Rule, with fifteen days’ notice before the group decides.",
|
||
"sections": {
|
||
"corePrinciple": "This Rule belongs to all of us, so any member can propose a change and every change is ours to decide together. Changes get more notice and a higher bar than other decisions, because they change how every later decision is made. Once a year we read the Rule together and fix what is not working. A Rule that is too hard to change gets quietly ignored, and one that is too easy to change protects nobody.",
|
||
"applicableScope": [
|
||
"Changing this Rule",
|
||
"Our values",
|
||
"Our methods"
|
||
],
|
||
"stepByStepInstructions": "A member writes the change as new wording beside the old, with the reason. It goes where every member will see it and is raised at the next meeting, at least fifteen days before it is decided. It is then decided as a decision of the whole group, and these fifteen days count as that method’s notice and deadline. Where that method ends in a vote, the vote needs at least our supermajority share of the active members who vote. If our Rule names no method for big decisions, the change passes when no active member objects within the fifteen days. Each change goes into our records with its date, the old wording and the reason.",
|
||
"objectionsDeadlocks": "A member who objects says which part harms the group and can offer other wording, and the fifteen days restart once for the new version. No change is made by an emergency decision, and no change applies to a conflict that has already started. No change can take away a member’s right to propose a change, to read this Rule or to leave. Where our bylaws or the law differ from this Rule, they govern. A change that fails twice waits six months before it comes back."
|
||
}
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"id": "do-ocracy",
|
||
"label": "Do-ocracy",
|
||
"supportText": "Whoever does the work decides how it gets done, tells the group first and asks for advice when it is costly.",
|
||
"sections": {
|
||
"corePrinciple": "We trust the people doing the work to decide how it gets done. Nobody needs permission to restock a shelf or fix a broken link. Saying what we are about to do lets others help or warn us before we start. Do-ocracy drifts toward whoever has the most free time, so we watch who ends up deciding. It breaks when doing becomes a way to dodge deciding, such as buying the van first and telling the group after.",
|
||
"applicableScope": [
|
||
"Everyday tasks",
|
||
"How work gets done",
|
||
"Small fixes and experiments"
|
||
],
|
||
"consensusLevel": 0,
|
||
"stepByStepInstructions": "A member who sees work that needs doing says what they plan to do where the people it touches will see it, then starts. They do not wait for approval. Some work needs advice first, which means asking the members it affects and anyone who knows the area and waiting three days. That covers work that spends more than $50, which also needs one other member’s written agreement. It also covers work that is hard to undo or speaks for the group in public. Anything that affects every member or spends more than $500 is a decision of the whole group. When the work is done, the member reports back in a few lines.",
|
||
"objectionsDeadlocks": "Any member can raise a concern before the work starts, and the member doing it waits until they have talked. Concerns after the fact go to a short review at the next meeting, which asks what to change next time rather than who to blame. Nobody is punished for acting in good faith. If the review finds harm, the group can undo the action and set a limit for next time. If the same few people end up deciding everything, we share the work out or rotate it."
|
||
}
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"id": "advice-process",
|
||
"label": "Advice process",
|
||
"supportText": "Any member can make a decision after asking the people it affects and those who know the area.",
|
||
"sections": {
|
||
"corePrinciple": "The person who notices a problem or a chance can decide, as long as they ask for advice first. Advice is not permission. The person deciding weighs it, decides and owns the result. This spreads decisions across the whole group and keeps the people affected in the loop. Asking costs time, and the process breaks when people skip the asking or ask only their friends.",
|
||
"applicableScope": [
|
||
"Everyday decisions",
|
||
"Decisions inside one area",
|
||
"Trying new ways of working"
|
||
],
|
||
"consensusLevel": 0,
|
||
"stepByStepInstructions": "A member who wants to make a decision writes a short proposal and shares it where every member will see it. They ask for advice from the members it affects and from anyone who knows the area, and give them at least three days to answer. They read the advice, decide, and post what they decided and why in our records. Spending over $50 needs one other member’s written agreement, and spending over $500 is a decision of the whole group. Decisions that affect every member, change this Rule or change who can be a member are a decision of the whole group.",
|
||
"objectionsDeadlocks": "Advice is not a veto, so the person deciding can go ahead against it, but they say in writing how they weighed it. Any member who thinks a decision ignored serious advice can ask the group to review it at the next meeting. A member who decides without asking first can be asked to pause or undo the decision. If the same advice is ignored again and again, the group can make that kind of decision a decision of the whole group."
|
||
}
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"id": "consensus-decision-making",
|
||
"label": "Consensus decision-making",
|
||
"supportText": "We decide together and move forward only when every member can live with the proposal.",
|
||
"sections": {
|
||
"corePrinciple": "We move together or not at all on the decisions that only work when everyone is behind them, such as our purpose, our name, who belongs and this Rule. Every member can stand aside or block. Consensus costs time and slows badly past about twenty people. It breaks when a block becomes one person’s veto over taste, or when consensus quietly comes to mean that the people who started the group agree.",
|
||
"applicableScope": [
|
||
"Our purpose and values",
|
||
"Who can be a member",
|
||
"Changing this Rule"
|
||
],
|
||
"consensusLevel": 100,
|
||
"stepByStepInstructions": "A member shares a written proposal where every member will see it at least three days before the meeting, and members who cannot come can send a concern or a block in writing. At the meeting a facilitator takes clarifying questions first, then concerns, and the group amends the proposal until it holds. The facilitator then asks whether anyone stands aside or blocks. To stand aside is to say I will not help, and I will not stop you. To block is to say this crosses a line for the whole group. With no block, and our quorum taking part in person or in writing, the proposal passes. Stand asides go into our records with it.",
|
||
"objectionsDeadlocks": "A block must name how the proposal harms our values, our purpose or this Rule, and the member who blocks helps write an alternative within two weeks. If the block still stands after that, the proposal fails and things stay as they are. If a quarter or more of those taking part stand aside, we treat the proposal as weak and rework it before it passes. When a matter cannot wait, a member may act alone only to prevent immediate harm. They tell every member within 24 hours, and the action lapses after 14 days unless the group confirms it. If blocks keep stalling us, we consider adding a fallback vote."
|
||
}
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"id": "consent-sociocracy",
|
||
"label": "Consent (sociocracy)",
|
||
"supportText": "A proposal passes when no member has a reasoned objection that it would harm our aims or is unsafe to try.",
|
||
"sections": {
|
||
"corePrinciple": "We decide by consent, not by full agreement. A proposal passes when it is good enough for now and safe enough to try, and every decision gets a review date. An objection is information that improves the proposal, not a veto. Consent takes practice, since people used to arguing for their favorite have to learn to say I can live with this. It breaks when whoever facilitates decides alone what counts as a reasoned objection.",
|
||
"applicableScope": [
|
||
"Policies",
|
||
"Roles and their areas",
|
||
"Working group decisions"
|
||
],
|
||
"consensusLevel": 100,
|
||
"stepByStepInstructions": "A member brings a written proposal with a review date, three months out unless it says otherwise. The facilitator runs rounds where each member speaks in turn. First a round of clarifying questions, then a round of quick reactions, after which the proposer can amend. Then a consent round, where each member gives consent or an objection. An objection counts when it names a harm to our stated aims or a reason the proposal is not safe to try. With no objection the proposal passes. If we have working groups, each decides this way inside its own area and has two members who also sit in the wider group, so information flows both ways.",
|
||
"objectionsDeadlocks": "The objector and the group test each objection together against the written test, and the facilitator does not rule on it alone. The group then changes the proposal to resolve the objection, often by shrinking it, adding a check or setting an earlier review. If it cannot be resolved in two meetings, the proposal goes to the wider group, or fails and things stay as they are. When a matter cannot wait, a member may act alone only to prevent immediate harm. They tell every member within 24 hours, and the action lapses after 14 days unless the group confirms it. At the review date we keep, change or drop the decision."
|
||
}
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"id": "rotating-roles",
|
||
"label": "Rotating roles",
|
||
"supportText": "Roles such as facilitator, note taker and treasurer pass from member to member on a schedule, so skills and power spread.",
|
||
"sections": {
|
||
"corePrinciple": "Any role that stays with the same person too long becomes theirs, and the group comes to depend on them. We pass roles around on a schedule so skills spread, power does not settle and the group survives anyone’s absence. People do some jobs less skillfully for a while, and that is how skill spreads. Rotation breaks when nobody is allowed to say no, so members can opt out.",
|
||
"applicableScope": [
|
||
"Meeting roles",
|
||
"Admin and contact roles",
|
||
"Roles that build skills"
|
||
],
|
||
"consensusLevel": 0,
|
||
"stepByStepInstructions": "We list the roles that rotate, such as facilitator, note taker, timekeeper, press contact and whoever reads the bank statement. Each role passes to the next willing member every three months, by a written order or by drawing names. The outgoing holder spends one shift or meeting beside the new one and hands over notes and anything else the role needs, and passwords the outgoing holder knew are changed. Roles that need continuity, such as the books, run for a year with a named second person learning alongside. No member holds the same rotating role twice in a row unless nobody else is willing.",
|
||
"objectionsDeadlocks": "Any member can opt out of a role for a term without giving a reason, and the next name on the list takes it. A member can swap a turn with another willing member. If a role keeps going unfilled, we shrink it or share it between two members. If someone in a role does not do what it needs, the steps grow in order, a reminder, then a conversation, then the next person takes over early. Nobody’s place in the group depends on taking a role."
|
||
}
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"id": "decisions-about-one-person",
|
||
"label": "Decisions about one person",
|
||
"supportText": "Decisions about one person’s aid, health, pay or legal situation go to the smallest circle that can make them.",
|
||
"sections": {
|
||
"corePrinciple": "Openness is for the shelf and the budget, not for one person’s private life. Decisions about one person, such as their aid, health, pay, legal situation or need for an accommodation, go to the smallest circle that can make them well. We record that the circle decided and leave out the details. This protects people, and it can also hide unfairness, so the circle is named, small and answerable to all of us.",
|
||
"applicableScope": [
|
||
"One person’s aid or support",
|
||
"Health or legal situations",
|
||
"Pay or accommodations"
|
||
],
|
||
"consensusLevel": 0,
|
||
"stepByStepInstructions": "The group names two or three members to serve as the circle for one year, as a decision of the whole group, with a backup for each. A decision about one person goes to the circle instead of the group chat or a meeting. The circle hears from the person, decides and tells them the result. Spending over $500 goes to the group as an amount and a kind of need, without a name. Our records note the date, that the circle decided and what kind of decision it was, with no names or details. Notes with details stay with the circle and are deleted once no longer needed.",
|
||
"objectionsDeadlocks": "A circle member who is close to the person steps aside and a backup takes their place. The person the decision is about can ask for it to be reviewed by one other circle member or a member they trust. Once a year the circle tells the group, without names, how many decisions it made and of what kind. Conflicts and safety concerns go to our conflict process, and a worker co-op or a group with staff also keeps written harassment and discrimination procedures."
|
||
}
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"id": "follow-through",
|
||
"label": "Follow-through",
|
||
"supportText": "Every decision names who does it, who checks and when we review it, and missed commitments meet steps agreed in advance.",
|
||
"sections": {
|
||
"corePrinciple": "A decision nobody follows up is only a wish. Groups without bosses last when someone’s job is to check and when the steps for not following through grow in order and everyone knows them in advance. So every decision we record names who does it and who checks. Written steps are a kindness, because unwritten ones turn into gossip and cliques. This breaks when checking turns into blame, or when nobody reads the record.",
|
||
"applicableScope": [
|
||
"Every recorded decision",
|
||
"Commitments and deadlines",
|
||
"When work does not happen"
|
||
],
|
||
"consensusLevel": 0,
|
||
"stepByStepInstructions": "Each decision that is hard to undo or touches others gets one line in our records. The line gives the date, what we decided, by which method, who does it, who checks and when we review it. The checker is someone other than the person doing it. At each regular meeting, checkers report on decisions that are due, in a few words. When a commitment slips, the steps go in order. First a friendly reminder from the checker. Then a conversation about what got in the way and what would help. Then the work moves to someone else.",
|
||
"objectionsDeadlocks": "Nobody is blamed for saying early that they cannot do what they took on, and the group finds another way. A member who keeps missing commitments after these steps is not asked to take on new ones for three months. Repeated or serious problems go to our conflict process. Once a year we read back through the record, close what is done and drop what nobody wants anymore."
|
||
}
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"id": "majority-rule",
|
||
"label": "Majority rule",
|
||
"supportText": "Each member has one vote, and a proposal passes with more than half of the votes cast.",
|
||
"sections": {
|
||
"corePrinciple": "Every member’s vote counts the same, and the side with more votes wins. Voting is fast, familiar and easy to record, and the bylaws of many co-ops and nonprofits require it. It also makes losers, so we use it for real choices between options and as a fallback, not for things people will have to live inside. It breaks when it is the only tool and the group splits along its first fault line.",
|
||
"applicableScope": [
|
||
"Choosing between options",
|
||
"Elections",
|
||
"Fallback when talks stall"
|
||
],
|
||
"consensusLevel": 51,
|
||
"stepByStepInstructions": "A member shares a written proposal or a list of options where every member will see it at least a week before the vote. Members discuss it and the final wording is fixed before voting opens. Each active member has one vote, cast in a meeting, by secret ballot or online. A vote counts only if our quorum takes part. A proposal passes with more than half of the votes cast. When there are more than two options and none gets more than half, the two with the most votes go to a second vote. The result goes into our records with the count.",
|
||
"objectionsDeadlocks": "A tie means the proposal fails and things stay as they are. A tie between two options in a second vote is settled by drawing lots. If too few members vote, the vote is held again within two weeks after a reminder to every member. A change to this Rule or to who can be a member needs our supermajority share of the active members who vote. Members who lose a vote can ask for their view to go into our records."
|
||
}
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"id": "supermajority-rule",
|
||
"label": "Supermajority rule",
|
||
"supportText": "A proposal passes only when our supermajority share of the active members who vote says yes.",
|
||
"sections": {
|
||
"corePrinciple": "Some decisions are too big to pass on a bare majority. A larger share protects members on the losing side and keeps big changes stable, because the next narrow vote cannot undo them. We use our supermajority share, which our consensus level setting names, so every high bar in this Rule uses the same number. It pulls against speed, and it breaks when a small minority uses the high bar to block every change.",
|
||
"applicableScope": [
|
||
"Changing this Rule",
|
||
"Who can be a member",
|
||
"Overriding a standing concern",
|
||
"Large or lasting spending"
|
||
],
|
||
"stepByStepInstructions": "A member writes the proposal and shares it where every member will see it at least a week before the vote. Members discuss it, and the final wording is fixed before voting opens. Each active member has one vote. A vote counts only if our quorum takes part. The proposal passes when our supermajority share of the active members who vote are in favor. The result goes into our records with the count and any dissenting views members ask to include.",
|
||
"objectionsDeadlocks": "A proposal that wins a majority but not our supermajority share fails, and things stay as they are. Members who voted no say what would win them over, and a revised proposal can return after a month. If too few members vote, the vote is held again within two weeks after a reminder to every member. A member who is the subject of a vote does not vote on it."
|
||
}
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"id": "coordinating-committee",
|
||
"label": "Coordinating committee",
|
||
"supportText": "A small committee handles what falls between working groups between meetings, and reports to every member.",
|
||
"sections": {
|
||
"corePrinciple": "Once a group has several working groups, some decisions fall between them, and someone has to hold them between meetings. A coordinating committee does that job and nothing more, for the members or for a board. It coordinates the working groups rather than directing them, and every member can see what it decided and replace it. It breaks when the committee starts deciding what belongs to the working groups or to all of us.",
|
||
"applicableScope": [
|
||
"Work that crosses working groups",
|
||
"Decisions between meetings",
|
||
"Shared priorities"
|
||
],
|
||
"consensusLevel": 0,
|
||
"stepByStepInstructions": "The committee has three to seven members with one-year terms, either elected by the members or sent by each working group. Its mandate, kept in our records, lists what it decides, such as priorities that cross working groups, shared schedules and questions no working group owns. It decides when no committee member has a reasoned objection, and meets at least monthly. Within a week of each meeting it posts a short summary where every member will see it. Anything that affects every member, changes this Rule or spends over $500 goes to the group as a decision of the whole group.",
|
||
"objectionsDeadlocks": "A working group that disagrees with a committee decision about its own area can send the matter to the group, and the decision waits until the group decides. Any member can question a committee decision at the next meeting. The group can recall the committee or any member of it as a decision of the whole group. No member serves more than three terms in a row, so new members learn the job."
|
||
}
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"id": "appointed-board",
|
||
"label": "Appointed board",
|
||
"supportText": "A board picks its own members, or owners or funders name some seats, within written limits everyone affected can read.",
|
||
"sections": {
|
||
"corePrinciple": "Many nonprofits have a board that chooses its own successors, and many companies give investors seats in return for money. That keeps a mission or an investment steady, but the people who do the work did not choose the board and cannot easily change it. It breaks when the board answers only to itself. So we write down what the board decides, what it cannot decide, how the people affected are heard and what they can see and undo.",
|
||
"applicableScope": [
|
||
"The board’s legal duties",
|
||
"Mission and money oversight",
|
||
"Hiring a director"
|
||
],
|
||
"consensusLevel": 0,
|
||
"stepByStepInstructions": "The board names its members for terms of two years and writes down how each seat is filled, including any seats named by investors, funders or founders. It decides only what our bylaws and this Rule give it, such as the budget, hiring the director and legal duties, and other decisions stay with the people doing the work. It meets at least every three months and shares a summary of every decision with members and staff within two weeks. At least one seat goes to someone chosen by staff, volunteers or the people the group serves. No director serves more than three terms in a row.",
|
||
"objectionsDeadlocks": "Anyone the board’s decisions affect can raise a concern in writing, and the board answers in writing within a month. A concern about a director goes to the chair, and one about the chair goes to the whole board. Investors’ rights, such as vetoes, are summed up in plain words where every member will see them. A deadlock follows our bylaws or the investment agreement. Nobody loses their place, pay or shifts for raising a concern."
|
||
}
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"id": "consensus-seeking-with-delegates",
|
||
"label": "Consensus seeking with delegates",
|
||
"supportText": "Each member group or team sends a delegate, and the delegates decide together on what affects the whole network.",
|
||
"sections": {
|
||
"corePrinciple": "We are a network of groups, and each group keeps control of its own work. Decisions that affect the whole network are made by delegates who carry their group’s views and report back. A delegate is a messenger with a mandate, not a boss. This lets a large network decide without everyone in one room. It costs time, since delegates go back and forth, and it breaks when delegates stop checking with the groups they speak for.",
|
||
"applicableScope": [
|
||
"Network-wide decisions",
|
||
"Shared resources",
|
||
"Coordination between groups"
|
||
],
|
||
"consensusLevel": 100,
|
||
"stepByStepInstructions": "Each member group or team chooses a delegate and a backup for a term of three months and tells the other groups who they are. Proposals go to every group at least two weeks before the delegates meet, so each group can discuss them and tell its delegate what it can accept. Delegates meet, share their groups’ views and work toward a proposal every group can live with. A proposal passes when no delegate objects for their group. Delegates report back to their groups within a week, and decisions go into our records.",
|
||
"objectionsDeadlocks": "A delegate who cannot agree without new instructions asks for a pause, and the delegates meet again within two weeks once delegates have checked with their groups. If a group still objects after two rounds, the delegates vote, and the proposal passes with our supermajority share of the delegates who vote. Otherwise it fails, and any group can still act on it alone. Any group can recall its delegate at any time. Each group keeps its own Rule, its own money and its own decisions."
|
||
}
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"id": "petition-and-referendum",
|
||
"label": "Petition and referendum",
|
||
"supportText": "When a tenth of active members sign a petition, the question goes to a vote of every member.",
|
||
"sections": {
|
||
"corePrinciple": "The power to put a question to all of us should not sit only with whoever runs the meetings. Any member can start a petition, and enough signatures force a vote of every member, even on a question a role holder or board would rather avoid. This keeps every role answerable to the members. It costs effort, and it breaks when petitions become a way to reopen settled questions every month.",
|
||
"applicableScope": [
|
||
"Questions leaders will not take up",
|
||
"Recalling a role holder",
|
||
"Changing this Rule"
|
||
],
|
||
"consensusLevel": 51,
|
||
"stepByStepInstructions": "A member writes the question as a proposal and shares it where every member will see it. Active members sign it by name on a list that only the members collecting signatures and two checkers see. When one tenth of active members have signed, the question goes to a vote of every active member within a month, with at least a week’s notice, or fifteen days if it changes this Rule. The vote counts only if our quorum takes part. It passes with more than half of the votes cast, or with our supermajority share of the active members who vote if it changes this Rule. Whoever holds that area carries it out.",
|
||
"objectionsDeadlocks": "A petition that fails cannot return for six months unless it has changed. If a petition is about one person, they can answer in writing before the vote, which every member sees. A petition cannot overturn a safety decision made under our conflict process or end anyone’s membership. Signatures stay private and are deleted once two checkers have confirmed the count."
|
||
}
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"id": "annual-budget",
|
||
"label": "Annual budget",
|
||
"supportText": "Members approve a yearly budget, and the people holding each line spend within it without asking again.",
|
||
"sections": {
|
||
"corePrinciple": "A budget is a decision made once instead of many times. Each year we agree how much we expect to bring in, what we will spend it on and who holds each line. Inside the budget, the work moves without asking again, and outside it, the group decides. A budget takes an evening a year and someone who can read the numbers. It breaks when nobody compares the plan with what really happened.",
|
||
"applicableScope": [
|
||
"Planned spending",
|
||
"Budget lines",
|
||
"Yearly reports"
|
||
],
|
||
"consensusLevel": 0,
|
||
"stepByStepInstructions": "Each year two members draft a budget showing expected income, a short list of spending lines, who holds each line and a reserve for hard times. The draft goes where every member will see it at least two weeks before it is decided as a decision of the whole group. Each line holder spends within their line without asking again and keeps receipts. Spending outside the budget needs one other member’s written agreement over $50 and is a decision of the whole group over $500. Every three months the line holders post what was spent against each line where every member will see it.",
|
||
"objectionsDeadlocks": "A line holder who expects to overspend by more than a tenth tells the group, and the extra amount follows the same limits as spending outside the budget. Any member can ask for a mid-year review, which happens at the next meeting. If no new budget is approved when the year ends, the old one continues for three months at the same amounts. Money set aside for aid is never moved to cover overspending elsewhere without a decision of the whole group."
|
||
}
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"id": "pay-and-hiring",
|
||
"label": "Pay and hiring",
|
||
"supportText": "We set pay on a written scale every member can read, cap the pay gap and decide hiring together.",
|
||
"sections": {
|
||
"corePrinciple": "Pay and hiring decide who the group becomes, so they belong to all of us. Pay that is secret or set by one person turns a cooperative into an ordinary workplace. We write down how pay is set and keep the gap between the highest and lowest pay small. This pulls against flexibility in a tight job market, and it breaks when exceptions pile up outside the scale.",
|
||
"applicableScope": [
|
||
"Pay and raises",
|
||
"Hiring",
|
||
"Ending someone’s job"
|
||
],
|
||
"consensusLevel": 0,
|
||
"stepByStepInstructions": "Our pay scale is written in our records, and every member can read it and what each role is paid. The highest pay is no more than three times the lowest unless the group decides otherwise. Once a year the members review pay as a decision of the whole group, and raises follow the scale rather than private deals. We hire by a decision of the whole group, or through a hiring working group with written criteria, and every finalist meets more than one member.",
|
||
"objectionsDeadlocks": "A member who thinks their pay breaks the scale can ask for a review by two members who do not set pay. Nobody votes on their own pay or on hiring a relative or partner. Ending someone’s job follows our written discipline steps, our conflict process and employment law, and in a worker co-op the bylaws on member shares. Worries about pay go to our conflict process, and nobody loses their place for raising one."
|
||
}
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"id": "on-site-lead",
|
||
"label": "On-site lead",
|
||
"supportText": "During a shift or action, one named member makes the safety calls on the spot, and the group reviews them afterward.",
|
||
"sections": {
|
||
"corePrinciple": "In the field there is no time for a meeting. During a shift, a distribution or an action, one named member makes the calls that keep people safe, and everyone follows them for that shift. Clear authority for a few hours and a review afterward is how crews stay safe without a boss. This power ends with the shift. It breaks when the lead’s word starts to carry over into decisions that belong to the group.",
|
||
"applicableScope": [
|
||
"Shifts and distributions",
|
||
"Actions and events",
|
||
"Safety calls on site"
|
||
],
|
||
"consensusLevel": 0,
|
||
"stepByStepInstructions": "Before each shift or action, the members going name one lead and a backup, choosing from members with the experience our Rule lists, or at least three shifts if it lists none. The lead checks that everyone knows the plan, who they are paired with and how to reach help. During the shift the lead can pull anyone out of danger, change the plan, end the shift early and get help from outside the group. Everyone follows the lead’s safety calls at once and discusses them afterward. Within a week, the members who were there review what happened and note what to change.",
|
||
"objectionsDeadlocks": "If the team loses confidence in the lead during a shift, the lead hands over to the backup on the spot, and nobody argues about it until everyone is safe. The lead’s power covers only that shift and only safety, so new rules, spending and membership go to the group as usual. Asking a person to leave follows our conflict process, and one member can be both lead and safety lead. A lead is not blamed for a good faith call, and repeated problems go to our conflict process."
|
||
}
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"id": "conflicts-of-interest",
|
||
"label": "Conflicts of interest",
|
||
"supportText": "A member with a personal stake in a decision says so and steps out of deciding it.",
|
||
"sections": {
|
||
"corePrinciple": "We trust each other, and we still keep personal stakes out of shared decisions. When a decision could benefit a member, their family, a close friend or another group they work for, they say so before it is made and leave the deciding to others. This protects the member as much as the group, since nobody can later say the decision was bent. It breaks when people stay quiet about stakes because naming them feels awkward.",
|
||
"applicableScope": [
|
||
"Spending and contracts",
|
||
"Hiring and pay",
|
||
"Aid decisions",
|
||
"Grants and elections"
|
||
],
|
||
"consensusLevel": 0,
|
||
"stepByStepInstructions": "Before any decision about money, contracts, hiring, pay, aid or choosing people for roles, whoever runs the decision asks whether anyone has a personal stake. A stake means the decision could bring a member, their family, a close friend or another group they work for money, work, aid or another benefit. A member with a stake says so, can answer questions and then leaves the decision to the others. The record of the decision notes that a stake was declared, without private details. Once a year each role holder writes down any stake they have in businesses or groups we pay, fund or work with, where members can see it.",
|
||
"objectionsDeadlocks": "A member who thinks someone has an undeclared stake raises it with that person first, or with any two members if raising it directly feels unsafe. If a decision was made with an undeclared stake, the group reviews it and can undo it. A stake is not wrongdoing, and nobody is blamed for declaring one. If so many members have a stake that too few are left to decide, it becomes a decision of the whole group, with every stake on record."
|
||
}
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"id": "closing-the-group",
|
||
"label": "Closing the group",
|
||
"supportText": "Closing or merging the group takes our supermajority share, and what we hold in common goes to a group with similar aims.",
|
||
"sections": {
|
||
"corePrinciple": "Groups end, and ending well is part of governing ourselves. We decide now, while we are calm, how we would close or merge, so a tired few cannot quietly shut the group down or walk away with what we built together. After debts and member shares are paid, what we hold in common passes to another group with similar aims. This pulls against members’ own claims on the money, and it fails when nobody reads it until the end.",
|
||
"applicableScope": [
|
||
"Closing the group",
|
||
"Merging with another group",
|
||
"Where shared money goes"
|
||
],
|
||
"stepByStepInstructions": "Any member can propose closing the group or merging it with another. The proposal goes where every member will see it and is raised at the next meeting at least thirty days before the decision. It is a decision of the whole group, and where that method ends in a vote, the vote needs at least our supermajority share of the active members who vote, if our quorum takes part. Two members chosen by the group then wind things down within three months. They pay debts, return member shares as our bylaws say, close accounts and give what remains to a group with similar aims that the members choose. They tell our partners early.",
|
||
"objectionsDeadlocks": "If the proposal fails, it waits six months before it returns, unless something major has changed. Nobody takes shared money or equipment home when the group closes, apart from member shares and money they are owed. Records about people we served are deleted rather than handed on, unless those people agree. A nonprofit also follows the law on where its assets go. While a legal matter is open, nothing is given away or deleted without a lawyer’s advice. If too few members remain to decide, the last active members follow these steps and tell every member what they did."
|
||
}
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"id": "decide-by-formula",
|
||
"label": "Decide by formula",
|
||
"supportText": "We agree a formula once, such as for pay, shared surplus or aid, and apply it the same way every time.",
|
||
"sections": {
|
||
"corePrinciple": "Some decisions come up again and again, and fighting about each one wears a group down and invites favoritism. We agree a written formula once, apply it the same way every time and change it only together. Pay scales, how a co-op shares its surplus, which aid requests are met first and rules written into code are all formulas. A formula is only as fair as its inputs, and it breaks when nobody checks what it really does.",
|
||
"applicableScope": [
|
||
"Pay and shared surplus",
|
||
"Sharing out aid",
|
||
"Repeated decisions"
|
||
],
|
||
"consensusLevel": 0,
|
||
"stepByStepInstructions": "The formula is written in plain words and agreed as a decision of the whole group, with an example worked through so every member can check it. It names its inputs, where they come from and who updates them. Two named members apply the formula each time. Every member can see the inputs and the result, except details about one person, which stay with the smallest circle that needs them. Code that applies a formula can be read by any member and matches the written version.",
|
||
"objectionsDeadlocks": "Any member can ask for a result to be checked, and two members recalculate it. If the formula gives a result that is clearly wrong or harmful, any two members can pause it, and that case becomes a decision of the whole group. The formula is reviewed once a year, with the members it affects taking part. Nobody loses aid or pay while a review is under way."
|
||
}
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"id": "liquid-democracy",
|
||
"label": "Liquid democracy",
|
||
"supportText": "Each member votes directly or hands their vote to another member they trust, and can take it back at any time.",
|
||
"sections": {
|
||
"corePrinciple": "Not every member can follow every question, and nobody should lose their voice for that. Each of us can vote directly or hand our vote to a member we trust, for one area or for everything, and take it back whenever we like. Delegates carry many voices, so their votes are open to every member. This keeps big votes from stalling for lack of turnout. It breaks when a few delegates collect most of the votes and stop answering to the people who gave them.",
|
||
"applicableScope": [
|
||
"Big votes in large groups",
|
||
"Votes on specialist topics",
|
||
"Getting enough votes"
|
||
],
|
||
"consensusLevel": 51,
|
||
"stepByStepInstructions": "Any active member can name another member as their delegate, for every question or for one area, such as money or code, in a record every member can see. When a vote opens, a delegate’s vote counts for themselves and for everyone who handed them a vote. A member who votes directly overrides their delegate on that question. A proposal passes with more than half of the votes, counting delegated votes, if our quorum is counted. Delegates explain their votes where every member will see it. A delegation ends when either member ends it, and a delegate cannot pass on votes they hold for others.",
|
||
"objectionsDeadlocks": "No delegate carries more than a tenth of all votes, or three votes in a group under thirty, and members who would push a delegate past that are asked to choose someone else. Every member gets a yearly reminder of who holds their vote. A member who disagrees with how their delegate plans to vote can take the vote back before voting closes. A change to this Rule needs our supermajority share of the active members who vote, counting delegated votes."
|
||
}
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"id": "participatory-budgeting",
|
||
"label": "Participatory budgeting",
|
||
"supportText": "Members propose how to spend a set amount of shared money, then vote on which proposals to fund.",
|
||
"sections": {
|
||
"corePrinciple": "The people closest to a need often know best how to meet it. Each year we set aside an amount of shared money, let members propose what to do with it and decide together which ideas to fund. This spreads both the money and the power to start things. It takes a few weeks and some help for first-time proposers. It breaks when only the most confident members propose, or when nobody checks what the money did.",
|
||
"applicableScope": [
|
||
"A set amount of shared money",
|
||
"Small grants",
|
||
"Member projects"
|
||
],
|
||
"consensusLevel": 0,
|
||
"stepByStepInstructions": "At least once a year we set, as a decision of the whole group, the amount, the dates and who can propose. Any active member can send a short proposal saying what it would do, what it costs and who will do it, and two members help anyone who wants support writing one. Proposals go where every member will see them for at least two weeks of questions. Each active member then marks every proposal they support. Proposals are funded in order of most support until the money runs out. Every proposal and the results go into our records.",
|
||
"objectionsDeadlocks": "No proposal is funded if it breaks this Rule or benefits only the person proposing it. A member with a personal stake in a proposal does not count the votes. Funded projects report back in a few lines within three months, and money they do not use returns to the pot. If a funded project cannot go ahead, the next proposal in order is funded instead."
|
||
}
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"id": "ranked-choice-voting",
|
||
"label": "Ranked choice voting",
|
||
"supportText": "Members rank the candidates or options, and the last place is dropped round by round until one has a majority.",
|
||
"sections": {
|
||
"corePrinciple": "When there are more than two choices, a single vote can let a candidate win whom most members did not want. Ranking lets each member say who they would accept next, so the winner has the support of a majority, not just the largest faction. It takes a little longer to count. It breaks when the count is not shown and members cannot check it.",
|
||
"applicableScope": [
|
||
"Elections",
|
||
"Choosing among several options"
|
||
],
|
||
"consensusLevel": 51,
|
||
"stepByStepInstructions": "Candidates or options are shared where every member will see them at least a week before the vote. Each active member ranks as many as they like, first, second, third and so on. The vote counts only if our quorum takes part. Two members count the first choices. If one has more than half, it wins. If not, the one in last place is dropped, and those ballots go to each voter’s next choice. This repeats until one has more than half of the ballots still counting. The full count of each round goes into our records.",
|
||
"objectionsDeadlocks": "If two are tied for last place, the one with fewer first choices is dropped, and if that is also tied, we draw lots. If two are tied in the final round, we draw lots. Any member can ask for a recount within three days, and two other members recount. For several seats at once, we fill one seat at a time and remove each winner from the next round. This lets the largest faction win every seat, so a group that wants smaller factions seated uses cumulative voting instead."
|
||
}
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"id": "approval-voting",
|
||
"label": "Approval voting",
|
||
"supportText": "Members mark every option they can accept, and the option with the most marks wins.",
|
||
"sections": {
|
||
"corePrinciple": "Many choices have several good answers, such as a date, a venue or a name. Marking every option we can accept finds the one most of us can live with, quickly and without long debate. It shows breadth of support, not strength of feeling, so we use it for choices where most options are fine. It breaks for decisions that are hard to undo, where it can pick a popular option nobody looked at closely.",
|
||
"applicableScope": [
|
||
"Choosing a date or place",
|
||
"Picking from a shortlist",
|
||
"Naming things"
|
||
],
|
||
"consensusLevel": 0,
|
||
"stepByStepInstructions": "A member lists the options where every member will see them and sets a deadline, at least two days for routine choices. Any active member can add an option before voting starts. Each member marks every option they can accept, as many as they like. When the deadline passes, the option with the most marks wins and goes into our records. A shared poll in our usual channel is enough.",
|
||
"objectionsDeadlocks": "If two options tie, we hold a quick second round between them, and if they tie again, we draw lots. If a member thinks the winning option causes real harm, they say so before the result is used, and the choice moves to our method for that kind of decision. Approval voting is not used to change this Rule, spend over $500 or decide about one person."
|
||
}
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"id": "random-choice",
|
||
"label": "Random choice",
|
||
"supportText": "When options are equally good, we draw lots, flip a coin or roll a die and accept the result.",
|
||
"sections": {
|
||
"corePrinciple": "Some choices do not deserve a debate. When options are equally good, or when we are stuck between two fine answers, chance settles it fairly and fast. Agreeing in advance to accept the result is what makes it work. Random choice ignores who cares more, so we keep it for ties and small things. It breaks when it is used to dodge a decision that needs real discussion.",
|
||
"applicableScope": [
|
||
"Breaking ties",
|
||
"Small choices",
|
||
"Assigning unwanted tasks"
|
||
],
|
||
"consensusLevel": 0,
|
||
"stepByStepInstructions": "Before we draw, everyone involved agrees that the options are acceptable and that the result is final for this choice. Then a member draws lots, flips a coin or uses a random tool where others can see it. The result is used straight away and goes into our records if it settles a vote or assigns work.",
|
||
"objectionsDeadlocks": "Anyone can say before the draw that the choice is too important for chance, and it goes back to our usual method. Once drawn, the result stands for that choice. A member who keeps drawing a task nobody wants can swap with a willing member. Random choice is never used to decide about one person’s membership, aid or safety."
|
||
}
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"id": "negotiated-decisions",
|
||
"label": "Negotiated decisions",
|
||
"supportText": "When a decision needs another group or partner to agree, named members negotiate within limits we set and bring the deal back.",
|
||
"sections": {
|
||
"corePrinciple": "Some decisions are not ours alone, such as a shared space, a partnership, a contract or a joint campaign. We make them with the other side by negotiating. We send named members with written limits, so they can make offers without giving away what the group never agreed to. A deal binds us only once we approve it. Negotiation breaks when the people at the table decide more than they were sent to.",
|
||
"applicableScope": [
|
||
"Partnerships and shared spaces",
|
||
"Contracts and leases",
|
||
"Joint work with other groups"
|
||
],
|
||
"consensusLevel": 0,
|
||
"stepByStepInstructions": "The group names one to three members to negotiate, with a written mandate covering what we want, what we can offer and what we will not accept. They meet the other side, hear what it needs and look for terms that serve both. They report back to the group at least every two weeks while talks continue. When they have a draft, it goes where every member will see it and is approved as a decision of the whole group before anyone signs. The signed agreement goes into our records with a date to review it.",
|
||
"objectionsDeadlocks": "If talks stall, either side can suggest a neutral person both trust to help, such as a mediator. Our negotiators cannot agree to anything outside their mandate, and they ask the group for a new mandate when they need one. If the group turns a draft down, the negotiators go back with the reasons. If no deal is possible, both sides keep things as they were, and nothing said in the talks binds us."
|
||
}
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"id": "advisory-committees",
|
||
"label": "Advisory committees",
|
||
"supportText": "A standing committee gives advice on decisions in its area, and whoever decides must answer that advice in writing.",
|
||
"sections": {
|
||
"corePrinciple": "We want the people who know an area, or who live with its results, to shape decisions without taking them over. An advisory committee studies questions in its area and gives advice that whoever decides must answer. It holds no power to decide, which keeps the lines clear. Many nonprofits use one to hear from the people they serve. It breaks when advice is asked for after the decision is already made.",
|
||
"applicableScope": [
|
||
"Advice from the people we serve",
|
||
"Technical or legal review",
|
||
"Policies that affect a few"
|
||
],
|
||
"consensusLevel": 0,
|
||
"stepByStepInstructions": "The group sets up each advisory committee as a decision of the whole group, with a written mandate naming its area, its members, a one-year term and who must ask it for advice. Members can include people from outside the group, such as people the group serves, chosen by the group or by the people they speak for. Before a decision in its area, whoever decides asks the committee and gives it at least two weeks to answer. The advice and the reply go into our records, leaving out details about any one person.",
|
||
"objectionsDeadlocks": "Whoever decides can go against the advice, but says why in writing before acting. If the committee thinks its advice was ignored, it can ask for the decision to go to the group. Any two members can pause a decision made without asking the committee until the committee has been heard. Committee members step aside from advice where they have a personal stake."
|
||
}
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"id": "panel-drawn-by-lot",
|
||
"label": "Panel drawn by lot",
|
||
"supportText": "We draw a few members by lot to study a question in depth, then decide it or advise the group.",
|
||
"sections": {
|
||
"corePrinciple": "When a question needs time and care, a small group of members drawn by lot can study it more deeply than all of us at once. A random draw gives every member the same chance to serve and keeps the loudest or best connected from deciding. Panel members get the time, the facts and the help they need. A panel breaks when the draw leaves out whole parts of the group, or when nobody uses what it finds.",
|
||
"applicableScope": [
|
||
"Questions that need deep study",
|
||
"Juries and review panels",
|
||
"Advice to the whole group"
|
||
],
|
||
"consensusLevel": 0,
|
||
"stepByStepInstructions": "The group decides, as a decision of the whole group, what the panel will look at, whether it decides or advises, and how long it has, usually a month. Two members draw five to twelve names in front of witnesses from the active members who say they are willing. If the group wants a balanced panel, it first sorts the willing members into a few groups, such as new and long-time members, and draws from each. The panel hears from members on every side and from people who know the subject, and has time to read. It writes a short report with its decision or advice and the reasons, and every member can read it.",
|
||
"objectionsDeadlocks": "A member who is drawn can decline without giving a reason, and another name is drawn. Panel members do not lobby or get lobbied outside the panel’s meetings. If the panel advises, whoever decides answers its advice in writing. If the panel decides, any member can ask the group to review the decision within two weeks, and it stands unless the group overturns it as a decision of the whole group. Panel members who need help with childcare or travel to take part get it from shared money."
|
||
}
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"id": "score-voting",
|
||
"label": "Score voting",
|
||
"supportText": "Members score each option on a set scale, and the option with the highest average score wins.",
|
||
"sections": {
|
||
"corePrinciple": "Some choices have several options people feel differently about, such as which projects to take on first. Scoring each option shows how strongly we support it and finds options most of us like, not just the favorite of the largest faction. Scores suit ranking a list of priorities. They break when people score tactically, giving every rival a zero, so we look at the spread of scores as well as the average.",
|
||
"applicableScope": [
|
||
"Setting priorities",
|
||
"Choosing among many options",
|
||
"Comparing proposals"
|
||
],
|
||
"consensusLevel": 0,
|
||
"stepByStepInstructions": "A member lists the options where every member will see them and sets a deadline of at least three days. Each active member scores every option from 0 to 5, where 0 means against and 5 means strongly for. A blank counts as no score, not as zero. When the deadline passes, two members work out each option’s average score and post the results, with how many members scored each option. The option with the highest average wins, or the list is ranked by average when we are setting priorities. Results go into our records.",
|
||
"objectionsDeadlocks": "An option scored by fewer than half of the members who took part cannot win, so a little-known option does not slip through. If two options tie, the one with more scores of 5 wins, and if they are still tied, we draw lots. If a member thinks the result causes real harm, they say so before it is used, and the choice moves to our method for big decisions. Score voting is not used to change this Rule or to decide about one person."
|
||
}
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"id": "cumulative-voting",
|
||
"label": "Cumulative voting",
|
||
"supportText": "Each member spreads a set number of votes, or dots, across the options or candidates, and the highest totals win.",
|
||
"sections": {
|
||
"corePrinciple": "When we choose several things at once, such as board seats or this year’s priorities, one vote per seat lets the largest faction take everything. Giving each member several votes to spread or stack lets members show what they care about most, and lets a minority that pools its votes win at least one seat. It is quick to run with dots on a wall. It breaks when members who do not coordinate spread their votes thin and an organized few win more seats than their numbers.",
|
||
"applicableScope": [
|
||
"Electing several seats",
|
||
"Setting priorities",
|
||
"Sharing out a few slots"
|
||
],
|
||
"consensusLevel": 0,
|
||
"stepByStepInstructions": "Before voting, we say how many will be chosen and how many votes each member gets, usually the number of seats or a third of the options. Options or candidates are shared where every member will see them, at least a week ahead for elections or at the meeting for priorities. Each active member spreads their votes however they like, including all of them on one choice. Two members count the totals, and the highest totals fill the seats or top the list. The counts go into our records.",
|
||
"objectionsDeadlocks": "If two tie for the last seat, they go to a quick second vote between the two, and if they are still tied, we draw lots. For elections, a vote counts only if our quorum takes part. Priorities guide our work, and spending over $500 is still a decision of the whole group. Members who cannot attend can send their votes to the counters beforehand, and any member can ask for a recount within three days."
|
||
}
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"id": "quadratic-voting",
|
||
"label": "Quadratic voting",
|
||
"supportText": "Members spend vote credits on options, and each extra vote on the same option costs more than the last.",
|
||
"sections": {
|
||
"corePrinciple": "One vote each cannot show how much a choice matters to someone. Here each member gets the same budget of credits. One vote on an option costs one credit, two votes cost four and three votes cost nine, so members can back what matters most to them without drowning out everyone else. It works only when each member really has one budget, and it breaks when one person can vote under several names.",
|
||
"applicableScope": [
|
||
"Sharing out a budget",
|
||
"Setting priorities",
|
||
"Choosing among many proposals"
|
||
],
|
||
"consensusLevel": 0,
|
||
"stepByStepInstructions": "Each active member gets the same number of credits for each vote, such as 100. Options are shared where every member will see them at least three days before voting opens. Members put votes on as many options as they like, for or against. The cost in credits is the number of votes times itself, so 5 votes on one option cost 25 credits. Unused credits do not carry over. When voting closes, the votes for each option are added up, and the options with the most votes win or rank highest. Two members check the count, and results go into our records.",
|
||
"objectionsDeadlocks": "Each member votes only once, as themselves. We check that each voter is one active member in good standing, without asking for ID documents. If anyone may have voted under more than one name, those votes are set aside and two members review them. Spending over $500 that a result calls for also needs a decision of the whole group. Quadratic voting is not used to change this Rule or to decide about one person."
|
||
}
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"id": "continuous-voting",
|
||
"label": "Continuous voting",
|
||
"supportText": "Proposals stay open, members can add or remove support at any time, and a proposal passes once its support holds long enough.",
|
||
"sections": {
|
||
"corePrinciple": "Some groups never all meet and keep many proposals in play at once. Instead of fixed voting days, proposals stay open, and each of us can back them or pull our support whenever we like. A proposal passes when enough support holds steady for a set time, so a sudden rush of votes cannot push it through. This suits large online groups. It breaks when members stop checking and old support carries decisions nobody still wants.",
|
||
"applicableScope": [
|
||
"Ongoing funding requests",
|
||
"Settings that change often",
|
||
"Large online groups"
|
||
],
|
||
"consensusLevel": 51,
|
||
"stepByStepInstructions": "A member posts a proposal where every member will see it, saying what it would do and what it costs. Any active member can add their support, or remove it, at any time. A proposal passes when more than half of active members have supported it without a break for seven days. Where votes are weighted, that means more than half of all weight. A passed proposal waits two more days before it takes effect, so members can check it. Support that a member has not renewed in three months expires.",
|
||
"objectionsDeadlocks": "Any member can object to a proposal while it is open, and an objection backed by a tenth of active members pauses the clock until the group discusses it. Spending over $500 also needs a decision of the whole group. If a passed proposal turns out to be harmful, any two members can pause it while the group decides. Proposals with no new support for six months close."
|
||
}
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"id": "formal-motions",
|
||
"label": "Formal motions",
|
||
"supportText": "At formal meetings, proposals move by motion, second, discussion, amendment and vote, in an order every member can follow.",
|
||
"sections": {
|
||
"corePrinciple": "Large meetings need a shared order so that everyone knows what is being decided and when. A motion puts one proposal on the table, a second shows at least two members want to discuss it, and amendments improve it before the vote. Many co-op and nonprofit bylaws expect this order. It protects fair debate and the minority’s right to be heard. It breaks when rules of order become a weapon that only the experts in the room can use.",
|
||
"applicableScope": [
|
||
"General meetings",
|
||
"Board meetings",
|
||
"Large formal votes"
|
||
],
|
||
"consensusLevel": 51,
|
||
"stepByStepInstructions": "A member makes a motion, a written proposal that starts with what we will do. Another member seconds it, or the motion drops. The chair states the motion and opens discussion, and members speak in turn, with anyone who has not yet spoken going first. Any member can move an amendment, which is seconded, discussed and voted on before the main motion. When discussion ends, the chair reads the final wording and calls the vote. A motion passes with more than half of the votes cast, unless our Rule asks for more. The note taker records each motion, who made it and the result.",
|
||
"objectionsDeadlocks": "Any member can ask the chair what is being voted on, and the chair answers in plain words before the vote. A member who thinks the chair has broken these steps can appeal, and the meeting decides by more than half of the votes cast. Ending discussion early needs our supermajority share of the active members who vote. A motion that fails cannot return at the same meeting unless it has changed. These steps never shorten the notice our Rule sets for big decisions."
|
||
}
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
"id": "how-we-are-covered",
|
||
"label": "How we are covered",
|
||
"supportText": "We write down who holds our money and legal status, what insurance, permits and licenses we rely on, and who can sign for us.",
|
||
"sections": {
|
||
"corePrinciple": "A group that borrows a sponsor’s status, a host’s insurance or one member’s name is only as safe as that arrangement. Starting fast on someone else’s cover pulls against knowing what that cover allows. It breaks when nobody knows what the sponsor permits, a policy lapses unnoticed or the one person who signs moves on.",
|
||
"applicableScope": [
|
||
"Fiscal sponsor, parent or legal entity",
|
||
"Insurance and waivers",
|
||
"Permits and licenses",
|
||
"Leases and host agreements",
|
||
"Who signs or speaks for us"
|
||
],
|
||
"consensusLevel": 0,
|
||
"stepByStepInstructions": "Taking on, changing or ending any of these is a decision of the whole group. Two members keep a cover sheet in our records. It names our sponsor or entity and our contact there, each policy with what it covers and when it ends, each permit or license with its renewal date, and who may sign. Our sponsor’s agreement binds us the way our bylaws would. Before we sign anything, take on a new kind of spending or hold an event that needs cover, the two members check that the agreement allows it. No member signs a contract, lease, waiver or permit for us without a decision of the whole group, except a renewal the cover sheet already lists, and two members sign whatever we sign. Every three months the two members check the sheet and post anything that ends within 60 days where every member will see it. After a serious injury, damage or a claim, once anyone hurt is cared for, the members who handle legal matters tell the insurer and our sponsor, and a legal hold starts.",
|
||
"objectionsDeadlocks": "Any member can see the cover sheet, which holds work contacts only and never a home address or other personal details. If our sponsor refuses something we decided, we follow the sponsor while the group decides whether to change course or change sponsors. If either keeper steps down, the next meeting names another, and until then nobody signs anything new for us."
|
||
}
|
||
}
|
||
]
|
||
}
|