Re: [gnso-trans-wg] Priorities Data

["Mike O'Connor" <mike@xxxxxxxxxx>]

At 09:56 AM 11/23/2007, Ross Rader wrote:


> On 23-Nov-07, at 10:49 AM, Mike O'Connor wrote:
>
> > - by using averages, we mask what is in fact a disagreement.
> I actually used the median. The mean and average didn't quite get
> close enough to what I intuitively saw as the consensus view.
>
> I'll take a look at your attachment and the rest of your response
> later today when I get a few more minutes than I have now. Thanks for
> the detailed response!
now you've done it.  your compliment inspired me to go one level 
deeper.  the result is attached.
here's an explanation of each page;

- i highlighted where each person placed the item in their ranking
- i noted who placed the item either in their top-3 or their bottom-3 
ranked list
- i nominated those folks to be "advocates" on one side or the other

here's a link to a pretty good (and pretty short) summary of a 
consensus decision-making process that explains some of the 
terminology you'll see on those pages;
http://www.ic.org/pnp/ocac/#anchor4038249

i'm a big fan of this kind of process -- i built a radio station that 
had this process hard-wired into the bylaws and can testify that we 
had a great time, became fast friends, built a great station, and 
never took a vote.
one of the things you'll note as you flip through the pages of my 
little attachment is that there are sometimes only advocates on one 
side of an issue, and sometimes there is only one advocate.  this 
very important -- because by letting those folks be advocates, we'll 
go a long way toward avoiding the "tyranny of the majority".
my suggestion would be to go through each issue on the conference 
call -- i don't think it will take long, especially as themes 
emerge.  if nobody else feels like taking on the role, i'd be happy 
to be the facilitator (except on a couple issues where i'll have to 
wear an "advocate" hat).  i used to facilitate meetings like this a 
lot when i worked for a living and got pretty good marks.
question - how long is the conference call scheduled to take?  given 
the dispersion in our answers, my guess would be that we would need a 
couple hours to get through all these.  are we on for that long?
onward,

m


voice: 952-232-5181
fax: 866-280-2356

web: www.haven2.com

Attachment: Issue details.pdf
Description: Adobe PDF Document