[Election-Methods] pizza and consensus
Jonathan Lundell
jlundell at pobox.com
Fri Dec 28 08:51:12 PST 2007
With the pizza example surfacing again (and again and again...), it
struck me that what bothers me about this example is that, in real
life, deciding on a pizza is one of the few places where just about
everybody would use informal consensus.
(For an introduction to formal consensus: http://www.consensus.net/)
I've come over the years to the regretful conclusion that formal
consensus is not workable for most organizations, at least not unless
some fairly stringent preconditions are met (some are described by
Butler at the site above; they include fairly explicit agreement on
group goals, along with a lot of time an patience).
But for pizza decisions, consensus rules. In particular, we try to
accommodate singleton minorities with strong negative preferences
("concerns" in consensus-speak): anchovy-haters, the allergy-ridden.
It doesn't matter that sausage and pepperoni is the Condorcet or
majority winner if there's a vegetarian in the group; we'll find some
consensus choice (fresh tomatoes and pesto, anyone?), given a little
time, good will, and discussion.
(That points up another problem with the pizza example: nobody ever
seems to go to a pizza parlor with individual portions, or
heterogeneous pizzas. But that's another problem.)
I wonder if there isn't a better simple example out there in which
voting is a better strategy than the alternatives.
More information about the Election-Methods
mailing list