add decision-making section

[libreriscv.git] / charter / discussion.mdwn

diff --git a/charter/discussion.mdwn b/charter/discussion.mdwn
index d00138d42ad60edf3bc48392763213f3274866b6..b437e02c82b7a0fff70adcf0fdde673a1b8b9c2e 100644 (file)
--- a/charter/discussion.mdwn
+++ b/charter/discussion.mdwn
@@ -20,16 +20,30 @@ Every contributor and their contributions and achievements are recognised.
 This further encourages people to contribute; they feel welcome, and their
 efforts valued.
 
+## Reality is acknowledged and accepted
+
+Denial of reality is the quickest way to kill the effectiveness of an
+organisation.  Acceptance and acknowledgement of the facts, without
+judgement, subsequently allows analysis to take place so that corrections
+can be applied.
+
+To reach a goal, it is necessary to have four things: (1) a model (2)
+observations of reality (3) a comparative analysis system and
+(4) a corrective feedback loop.  Whilst (1, 3 and 4) are sufficiently
+obvious and objective that nobody really thinks much of them, when
+things get hard it is often challenging for people to objectively face
+reality, particularly if other Systemic Laws are being violated as well.
+
 ## Everyone is respected and honoured, past and present
 
 When someone leaves a project, particularly under less than ideal circumstances,
 it is still vitally important to value and respect both them *and* their
-contributions.  
+contributions.
 
 ## Role, Seniority and Expertise are all respected.
 
 This can be very challenging, particularly when someone with more expertise
-meets someone whose length of service is greater.  
+meets someone whose length of service is greater.
 
 ## We accept the responsibility of our position
 
@@ -61,3 +75,27 @@ opportunity to grow and learn, we know and trust that nobody will take
 that away from us, and, further, that our achievements and the credit
 will be ours.
 
+# Decision-making and new contributors
+
+This section has two aspects.  The first is that everything but unanimous
+decision-making is disempowering and de-motivating (harmful).  Majority rule
+(mob rule) is easily demonstrated to be so: anyone *not* in the majority
+quickly gives up in resignation, even if their contribution is critically
+important.  Unanimous decision-making requires that the issue be discussed
+until it is fully understood by *all* members (or members recognise that
+they do not or cannot understand the issue, and abstain).
+
+The introduction of new contributors really requires specially spelling
+out.  The last thing that is needed is for a new contributor to introduce
+changes that drain the time and resources of prior contributors to the
+point where the project fails.  Unanimous decision-making ensures that
+all members (who inherently have a longer term of service to the project
+than any new member) have the right to veto proposals that disrupt the
+project.  In a "mob rule" scenario, there is the potential for enough
+new members to join simultaneously that they could easily completely
+take over the project.  Unanimous decision making prevents this scenario.
+
+It is also worthwhile noting on the subject of unanimous decision-making:
+its effectiveness decreases as the number of contributors goes significantly
+above around eight.  If that occurs, delegate!  Form sub-projects, agree
+roles and responsibilities, and go for it.  Divide and conquer.