What is consensus?

juan juan.g71 at gmail.com
Tue Dec 12 04:02:25 PST 2017


On Tue, 12 Dec 2017 02:10:48 -0500
Steve Kinney <admin at pilobilus.net> wrote:

> 
> 
> On 12/10/2017 01:06 PM, g2s wrote:
> > 
> > -------- Original message --------
> > From: Georgi Guninski <guninski at guninski.com>
> > Date: 12/10/17 8:02 AM (GMT-08:00)
> > To: cypherpunks at lists.cpunks.org
> > Subject: Re: What is consensus?
> > 
> > On Sun, Dec 10, 2017 at 07:42:02AM -0800, g2s wrote:
> >> Consensus is defined as agreement. Voting is one process to
> > (hopefully) reach it.
> >> https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/consensus
> > 
> > 
> > lol
> > "If voting could change things, it would have been outlawed." --
> > anon
> > 
> > Just check what fucks were elected by voting all over the world.
> > 
> > I was NOT making an argument that voting works to change anything
> > systematic in media driven indoctrinated societies. I was simply
> > defining the word... further consensus Agreement doesn't always work
> > either, but if the "block" is honored it slows down the process and
> > has potential for correcting mistakes that may be harder to repair
> > after the fact.
> 
> Re "What is consensus?" Mirmir replied "Ask any Quaker."
> 
> That's me, and I am now required (dammit) to give a straight answer
> because I'm a Friend in good standing, a "made guy" so to speak.



	I wanted to comment on the quaker thing as well. The
	word consensus is  derived from and requires consent. Theocracy
	or religious fraud, especially of the jew-kkkristian variety
	has fuck to do with consent. By definition fraud destroys
	consent. 

	By the way, jew-kristian theocracy is the very opposite of
	anarchism and cypherpunkry since its anti-philosophical
	root is an all knowing all seeing tyrant.

	




> 
> The quote from Georgi above seems to be part of the original thread so
> at least there's a context to answer the question in.
> 
> Consensus means agreement.  And that means a messy, organic, all too
> human hairball at work.  The Quakers are often accused of governing
> themselves by consensus, and have been so accused for something
> approaching 400 years.  Here's how we do it, more or less.
> 
> Disclaimer:
> 
> The following is not the "rules of RSOF engagement," so much as my own
> observation of Friends' process, developed from 20+ years of full
> participation, including lots of committee work for my monthly and
> yearly Meetings.  I do push the Gospel of Truth in the manner of
> Friends, promoting the religious practice that makes Friends "a
> peculiar people" - which, back in the day, meant a "distinct" group.
> 
> In practical application among Friends, consensus arises from local
> communities, small enough that everyone is at most at one remove in
> acquaintance from one another.  Friends participate, first and
> foremost, in an agreement among themselves to work together in
> compliance with a specified process for decision making.
> 
> When geographically dispersed Friends participate in regionally
> sponsored projects (and we do, non-stop), representatives selected by
> participating Meetings form committees; these committees execute the
> same consensus procedure to arrive at their recommendations to the
> regional body as a whole.  No decision on matters of faith and
> practice or Meeting business becomes "binding" without advice and
> approval from Meeting as a whole.
> 
> Quakers don't do "consensus" as that word is understood in a secular
> context.  We make decisions based on "a sense of the Meeting," and we
> call the process for that discernment.  Any Friend who has had
> Quakerism 101 understands that we are discerning the will of God,
> most properly so in silence broken only by vocal ministry as so led;
> having found that, the next step is to seek "way forward" toward
> compliance with our orders from the head office.
> 
> Friends do present a peculiar position on God, this time in the modern
> sense of the word peculiar.  Weighty Friends (made gals and guise who
> may speak rarely but do command attention, for reasons) have long
> agreed:  Nobody can define or describe God.  But whatever that word
> stands for, we know it when we see it in motion, and accept that once
> set on a path by that force, one must do /something/ regardless of
> personal preferences or interests.
> 
> "Friends don't vote," but we do discriminate:  Membership in our
> Society is accomplished by a consensus between oneself and the local
> Meeting's membership at large - there's a formal process for that,
> and new or transferred members are recorded or "minuted" as such by
> the clerk of their Meeting.  Roles such as Clerk of Meeting,
> Trustees, etc. will nearly always be filled by members of Meeting, as
> will committees that engage in pastoral counseling where
> confidentiality issues may arise. All other committees are wide open
> for any member or attender to sit in on.
> 
> Friends normally meet weekly for meeting for worship, and monthly for
> "meeting for worship with a concern for business," which is open to
> all. Committees report to the latter meeting on a monthly basis, but
> otherwise work where and as expedient.
> 
> It can take Friends half of forever to get anything outside of
> established routine done, but what we do sticks.  Conversely, when a
> situation requires it Friends form and operate voluntary organizations
> in near real-time.  Friends' Service Committees have crossed active
> battlefields in caravans carrying relief supplies to besieged
> civilians, literally using their religious authority and
> single-minded commitment as their only shield and weapon.
> 
> Friends enjoy a certain notoriety for tolerance, but not the usual
> kind where someone is "tolerated" for the sake of appearance or
> process compliance:  Every "sinner" is welcome, and as living proof
> one could point to several committed atheists who rate as 'weighty'
> Friends in the community.
> 
> Disclaimer II:  The above is presented as a resource for anarchists
> and other loose ends looking to mine historical and (in effect) covert
> examples of social organization for background, and any components
> that can be usefully recycled.  No warranty of fitness for use for any
> purpose is expressed or implied.
> 
> Especially beware, the real life Religious Society of Friends lives up
> to the bare bones description above "on a good day".  In addition to
> routine errors routinely corrected, on occasion a Meeting or
> responsible Committee may go off-track and require correction from
> the floor, so to speak.  I am not supposed to know that a Meeting may
> occasionally "lose its minutes" covering periods of time when
> scandalous events were afoot, and neither are you.
> 
> We get a lot of lookey-loos, typically people who see the RSOF as an
> elite family-friendly social club for liberal academics and
> professionals.  Some of them even settle in and convert, to the full
> extent they are so led.
> 
> BTW, Quakers are "Friends of Jesus" [John 15:14-16] first and
> foremost, and friends of each other by virtue of that relationship.
> 
> Thus ends St. Erroneous' Epistle to the Cypherpunks.
> 
> I leave you with this prophesy:  Many things shall come to pass, yea
> verily shall many things come to pass.
> 
> :o)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 



More information about the cypherpunks mailing list