[EM] Consensus decision-making in wikipedia

[Gervase Lam]

I managed to find a few 'interesting' things in connection with
Consensus decision-making in wikipedia.

(Apologies if the following links are a bit mangled.  I personally don't
like URL shorteners as they make things more cryptic.)

One person questioned whether consensus was like a veto system where
everybody had to agree with a decision (i.e. the proposer has to make
compromises on the initial proposal to get everybody to agree)?  If so,
isn't that what happens already anyway with regards to how bills are put
through parliaments?

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Consensus_decision-
making#Doesn.27t_get_the_point_of_consensus_vs._majority_rule>

With regards to how consensus differed from majority voting, one of the
linked examples mentioned the following consensus voting 'method':

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consensus_decision-
making#Use_of_colored_cards>

The Consensus decision-making article mentions that Religious Society of
Friends (commonly known as Quakers) currently use consensus in their
meetings:

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_Society_of_Friends#Decision_making_among_Friends>

Aside from the religious in manner of the proceedings, it seems that the
actual mechanics of it work well.

However, in the section titled "definition of majority", 'Roadrunner'
makes the interesting point that "...the Politburo Standing Committee of
the Chinese communist Party appears to make decisions via consensus, but
this doesn't make the decision making democratic."

There are a few other things discussed in the Discussion/Talk page apart
from Roadrunner's point.  Examples include what happens to consensus
decision-making when trust is low and the use of Liberum Veto by the
Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth in the distant past.

Also mentioned in the main article page is the Green Party's use of a
consensus/voting hybrid decision-making method:

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consensus-seeking_decision-making>

Thanks,
Gervase.