[aur-general] Circle that A (WAS: Re: Someone hug sergej)

[kludge]

> They just  want the TU's to function  as well as possible, after a
> model that has proven
> to be more successful than the anarchy model that currently runs on [community].

this is the third or fourth time i've seen "anarchy" abused so casually
in this discussion.

"anarchy" != disorder, or even lack of order/organization.  for dog's
sake, do a little homework before you use it pejoratively again.

try this http://www.gmu.edu/departments/economics/bcaplan/anarfaq.htm
site or this http://www.infoshop.org/faq/index.html one.

there are, though, lesser and greater, more- and less- functional forms
of non-hierarchical organization.  one of the keys to success is
effective, equal discussion and decision-making processes.  one of the
most effective is formal consensus.  "consensus" is another concept i
see abused without much thought here.

what i see is not folks trying to develop a plan of action that suits
the needs of all stake-holders.  i see a few personalities trying to
impose their agendas by winning arguments. (greg *cough* allan *cough*
loui *cough*) please y'all, consider the possibility that *your*
brilliant idea may not be the *only* brilliant idea out there.

check out: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consensus_decision-making and
http://www.consensus.net/ .

i may not be the most active participant here, but i deeply value the
open and community-run nature of the aur-end of arch.  i'd be pretty
disappointed if the authority to determine who participates and how was
handed to a smaller, less-accountable elite.  so, to sum up, work
together, quit trying to "win," and circle that a, motherf**kers!

-kludge