However I'm missing some things--can you help me find them?
I want to talk more about people, working with them, their limitations and potential. I want to talk about #governance, #facilitation, #voting, #cognitivebiases and other concrete things that can be tried (and falsified) in #groups.
Let me know if you're interested, or boost if you think you have followers who are interested.
even so we talked about some of those subjects earlier, and we might know to some extend the points of the other, ain't they static and will also develope through critical discourse.
So yes, they are definatly in my interest.
wanna take a current event as a basis to let different topics emerge?
and this article in specifc as a starting point?
@paulfree14 Thanks, I read 'Revenge against the Commons' yesterday https://zadforever.blog/2018/04/24/the-revenge-against-the-commons/ also covering la #ZAD
Once physical violence is involved in a group, a whole other way of behaving is required. I am interested in that to a degree: we do selbstverteidigun at the Judo club I go to. Have you been to la ZAD yet?
haven't read that one.
this one is more about 'conflicts within social movements'
That's why I thought it would be of interest:
- 'bitter differences about how to deal with power dynamics'
- 'how to resist the divide-and-conquer tactics'
- 'come out of each conflict stronger and more capable of evaluating our effectiveness'
- 'justify negotiating... to maintain the unity of the movement'
''Is unity necessarily the best way for a movement to build strength? Or is it better to foster an irreducible diversity of approaches, so that negotiation will be, if not impossible, at least—useless?
@paulfree14 Ah thanks, I will read through it then :)
Bob Cannell has been blogging about his research in this area and experiences at Suma and elsewhere.
@dazinism Thanks! Do you know if he's on Mastodon?
Concerning #voting, you may be interested by the #MajorityJudgment which is judged by its authors to be “superior to any known method of voting and to any known method of judging competitions, in theory and in practice”.
- comicbook (fr) : « Vous reprendrez bien un peu de démocratie ? » https://lechoixcommun.fr/
- textbook (en): « Majority Judgment: Measuring, Ranking, and Electing » http://libgen.io/book/index.php?md5=BF67AA4298C1CE7633187546AA53E01D
you mean this method:
it's a method that might make sense to choose for one scenario but not for the other. depending on the decision that is to be made different facilitation can improve the process.
many decisions are already made befor the actual voting.
'framing' 'spin' 'narratives' ...etc.
Many decision making concepts ignore this part
Yes, however be aware that #MajorityJudgment's authors recommend to not learn it from #Wikipedia due to its errors (and I would add: lack of mentioning the importance of applied criterions).
I prefer for example score voting that contains out of 2 voting process.
First a negative one checking the resistance towards an idea.(cause ppl can do anything, even the most unpopular idea, and don't bother anyone as long their isn't a ressistance)
Then another round that votes on what you actually want.
For each choice, its majority-grade is such than at least 50% of voters agree to judge this choice at _least_ greater or equal than its majority-grade, and at least 50% of voters agree to judge this choice at _most_ lower or equal than its majority-grade.
Using medians as such is actually what makes the #MajorityJudgment resilient to manipulations: to strategic or cranky votes.
- it usually sets a default grade of "To reject", thus unless for a given choice more than 50% of voters vote, and vote some other grade, its majority-grade (middlemost) remains "To reject".
- it ranks, but does not _ask_ voters to rank or compare choices at all, hence it is independent of irrelevant alternatives.
@julm @nemoudeis @HygieneMentale Thanks! I'll look into Majority judgment again. I'm a big fan of scoring as a way of expressing yourself in voting methods, however I remember being a bit skeptical of the decision rule based on the median and not the average score, but I'm motivated to look again now :)
On score voting methods, read chap17 (at least intro and outro) of the textbook on #MajorityJudgement
Using medians is much less manipulable than sums or averages (which become more and more manipulable as the expressing scale grows).
And medians can preserve unchanged the expressing judgments, whereas a sum or an average is not necessarily an input, hence actually meaningless within the #CommonLanguage of the voters
The #infosec and #crypto are each pretty big world's on their own. Do you know how far down the rabbit hole you want to go?
I know of some things offered on Coursera that would probably take you from almost 0 to competent admin in about a month or two. Crypto needs math skills that aren't common.
It's the best software written by mostly altruistic people for unimpeachable reasons. It's puzzled me for decades why most businesses don't take advantage of it. Found out why recently. If something goes wrong, e.g. at a bank, they can't sue people who aren't paid.
@tbeckett Interesting to hear. I'm stillll finishing an 'article' about cooperative voting after over 12 months. (tldr: include 'none of the above', score each option, weigh negative score slightly.) After I'm done I would really like to get more involved with sociocracy and agile. I really what I've read about Scrum (the official handbook is v short.) Sociocracy, however, I have some more skepticism towards: several project I know use it to mask hierarchies. But I know there's a lot of good.
Generalistic and moderated instance. All opinions are welcome, but hate speeches are prohibited. Users who don't respect rules will be silenced or suspended, depending on the violation severity.