More order in the council (methods, "traditions") ------------------------------------------------- Troubled council order: some (obvious) ideas that can help to restore order in voter groups and councils. If there is not enough order in the groups the whole state can crash, simple things are often enough to prevent that. A lot has already been said about this here before, such as to divide in sub-groups of 10 who work through the issues beforehand and each having a spokesperson, to eat / drink something before starting, to sit around a fire, to have a council chair person, to vote by majority and how to comfort those that lost a vote. None of that would always need be necessary and it is not the law. At the same time it can mean the difference between complete chaos and order. ./064-council-internal-organization You can imagine that if somewhere this law system is getting done, I will worry about chaos, because it is my system and if it doesn't work ... it is my fault to some degree. So better now beforehand do whatever possible, so that even during the beginnings of disorder possible answers to that disorder where already known years in advance. They can then be immediately put to use and quell the disorder before it erupts, before it can even be called a problem to be solved. Some more on the same topic: If there is a lot of disorder, shouting, interrupting excessively and non-constructively, replacing power of volume with power of argument, jumping too quickly to shouting votes before the vote can be taken ... all that to a degree the group breaks apart, the debate breaks apart ... - Pass a law that only people above 50 (or 40 in case of a young population) can be elected into the councils. Older people tend to be more quiet and considerate. This is a very easy general rule that can be passed for the entire nation if the system is not stable otherwise. - One could give each person in the council a speaking token that can be in two configurations, for example a flat sheet of wood about 10 x 10 cm, wood color on one side and the color of his/her grouplet on the other side. One can also give each person two voting items, one for yes and one for no. The chair-person has for instance a short running timing device like an hour glass that is big and fast, say 1 minute or 45 seconds. Since there is an agenda, and there are spokespersons for each sub-group, the chair person can start with the first issue and give the word to each of the spokespersons for the grouplets in turn. The chair person says: subject so-and-so, I give the word to the oldest spokesperson, who is spokesperson of the grouplet. Then the spokesperson voices the majority opinions of the grouplet, getting only the time that is in the glass. When time is out but spokesperson continues to talk, the chair person hits with his hammer on the block and says: "thank you". Then the chair person causes a short silence of 10 seconds. Actually that can be very important to the thinking of everyone, because the words of the spokesperson must have some time to arrive. If the 10 seconds is interrupted by speaking in the council, then it must be redone, 15 seconds is also a good time I think. At this point the council is probably orderly already. It can proceed in like manner: the next oldest spokesperson, until the youngest. Then there can be a round where everyone can talk for himself/herself, also the spokespersons who before where in the service of the grouplet. The chair person asks "who wants to talk." Then everyone who wants to talk will turn the color of his sheet of wood to his grouplet color if he/she wants to talk, and to the wood color if he/she does not want to talk. The chair-person will follow the circle and let each person who made it known he/she wants to talk, talk in the same way as the spokespersons did: measuring the time, and then measuring the silence time. Now everyone has mentioned their opinion, which where already worked through in previous grouplet meetings, so that means everyone already knows what it is about and what the differences of opinion are. Real debates between people would already have occurred during the interactions between the grouplets, therefore there is no need for further debates. If there is a need for further debates, it can again be done by the interaction between the grouplets. The chair person will then say: "We can vote on this issue now, or we can leave a decision for a later moment. Is there anyone who wishes that a vote be not held today ?" If someone strongly feels that the council must re-consider and has made very important mistakes, for example it thinks a bridge is standing but it is actually destroyed and the council needs time to review evidence and then will reach another conclusion, if someone such burdened with knowledge is part of the council he must stand up. He/she does not say anything, because it is better for order this way. If the chair person notices someone standing up, he says: "the council will not vote today, and honorable council member will not delay another vote for a year, I will mark the date for you, thank you." The chair person then gives the word to the person having stood up or still standing, saying: "what is the problem." The person must then mention the problem in as short a wording as possible, not exceeding the usual time limit for speaking. Afterwards the chair person says to this person "it has been heard by the council" and then smacks his hammer on the block for good measure. That person will then not be allowed to cause this kind of a delay for a whole year, which is meant to make sure this kind of delay does not happen a lot, and only when it is very important and urgent in the belief of that council member. Then back to the chair-person saying: "We can vote on this issue now, or we can leave a decision for a later moment. Is there anyone who wishes that a vote be not held today ?" The chair-person will put in the usual silence period, 10 - 15 seconds. At the end of that silence period the chair person says: "do the grouplet spokespersons want a vote now." The grouplet spokespersons will raise their hand if they want a vote, and not raise their hand if they do not want a vote at that moment. If the vote is equal then there will not be a vote, but later. If the decision is to vote later, the chair-person will mark the issue for another discussion on the council agenda, but not yet state a date for that. The chair-person will end the meeting with a list of items that still have to be discussed later. After the meeting is over, the spokespersons and the council chair person will get together and fix dates for these issues on the agenda. They can do that because they know the issues well and know when their grouplets can discuss things and so on. If the decision is to vote then, the chair person says: "everyone now has time to vote." The chair person measures one quantity of time. The people are now allowed to talk to each other and make noise. Everyone who is in good order following the meeting picks up their voting item of choice. Those who vote place their voting token in front of their spokesperson. Once the time is up or if everyone has voted and is quiet, the chair person smacks the hammer to the block. The chair person gets up, and asks each spokesperson how many in favor and how many against. Everyone in the council must be able to hear this. This means that the grouplet can verify that the spokesperson has it right, and everyone can hear and add the numbers to know the vote was added correctly. The chair person gets up to honor the council when asking the spokespersons what the vote was. The chair person keeps standing while the votes are being said. This also means everyone may know that votes are being counted when the chair person is standing. (If the chair person is unable to stand up, perhaps because in a wheel chair having inoperable legs, then the chair person does not stand up and does not perform an alternative gesture but the issue is ignored completely.) Then the chair-person attempts to add the numbers. Once successfully added, maybe a bead counter could help, he announces whether the proposal passed, was rejected, or had an equal number of votes on both ends. If there is an equal number, the chair person will say: "undecided, equal number of votes on both sides." The chair person will then mark the issue for re-debate/re-vote (as above). - Voting tokens: It may work to have round wooden blocks of roughly 10 cm in diameter, with a hole through them of about 2 cm wide. Each person gets 2 such blocks, one for yes and one for no. Say they are cylinders (relatively easy to make from a beam of wood). One of these cylinders can have a color for yes, and the other another color for no. Each side of all the 10 blocks for one grouplet could be decorated differently, for example one can have a line around it, another two lines, another some stripes, etc etc. Then the grouplet spokesperson, say, has a piece of string, which is not much of a weapon (compare: stick). The string has the color of that grouplet, which also means a spokesperson could be identified as the person having that piece of string with him / her. (If the spokesperson makes violent gestures with the rope, even if for fun, the chair person suspends that spokesperson. The democracy is the reverse of and solution to direct violence.) (Such a colored rope can also function as a token representing that grouplet.) The members of the grouplet, will then put their vote on the string, on one side the yes and on the other the no. The spokesperson adds his / her vote last, because of his / her power position, he / she must take a step back for the ordinary members. These strings of votes can be shown to the public, so that they can verify who voted what, how if their man / women - delegate - voted. Another way of voting is hand-raising, which is lots faster. The chair-person could also do something like: standing up and saying "vote by hand-raising," then if there is any doubt about the result, say "not absolutely clear, please vote with the strings." Then the whole token-string procedure would start. The chair person could also use the token-procedure for things that are extremely important, because the token procedure is more difficult. With the hand-raising, the people could of course also hold the concerning token (yes/no) up. That would mean one would only have to ask for one hand-raising, yes and no would raise hands together, using a different color. If after a hand-raising vote someone is not confident enough in the result, he / she puts up both yes and no tokens simultaneously after the vote. That is a vote of "no confidence in the voting procedure / counting which just happened." When the chair person sees these no confidence in the procedure second votes, she will count them. If there are 4 or more no confidence votes, the string procedure will commence. The chair person says "not everyone could see all the votes, please vote again with the strings." It may be a nice idea that if the chair person asks each spokesperson for the votes, that the spokesperson holds up the string with tokens and also says the result in numbers. That way everyone can (again) see the actual votes, not least of which the voters can identify their own vote on the string (through its unique markers and close proximity.) All in all this probably would work, low tech is often a good idea in these kinds of matters I think because it is readily understood by all and can therefore be less easy to play tricks with. It may also happen that members want the records to show who voted what, which is valuable information in any case. If that is decided it might be fast if the grouplet spokespersons record the votes during the voting procedure (?). Bit of paper, names, grid, y/n/?; in any case the spokesperson probably already knows all the votes beforehand from the grouplet meetings. These records could be added to the records of the meeting after the meeting was over, and become part of the public record (pretty important information for voters who want to know what their delegate is doing ...). If doing it this way one could decide to skip the string procedure(s), because if things are recorded per person already they could always be re-counted from records. The chair person will then assume some people might want to let that sink in and therefore will allow for talking and noise in the council for the duration of one speaking time, or until quiet has returned. The chair-person will then smack his hammer to the block and say something like "thank you, next item," or "thank you, see you at the next meeting, ...". It is not necessary to end the council with all kinds of formalities, once the chair person ends the meeting with a bang, that's the end and he/she formally is no longer having a right to address the council in order. So, if the chair-person wishes to make statements of order or other, he/she must do so before ending the meeting with the hammer. - Disorder. Persons who are in disorder, speak too long or too aggressively, do not speak nicely: the chair person can suspend such people by hitting the block with the hammer more then once. A person is suspended a first time only until the end of that item. When the next item begins, the chair person having suspended someone will say: "is everyone present ?" and then wait until suspended person has returned. If the chair-person forgets someone was suspended, the grouplet spokesperson must yell out and say something like "I'll get him," and get up to get him. If everyone has forgotten even the grouplet spokesperson, someone not a grouplet spokesperson notices the problem, he must tap his / her spokesperson of his / her grouplet on the shoulder and say that someone is missing. In general it is not a bad thing if people start yelling that someone is missing, because it is important that all are present that must be present, and the meeting could be assumed not to exist without all present that must be present. Hence there is no order if not all are present that must be present, so what is even a council chairperson in that case, or a grouplet spokesperson. If someone is suspended twice in the same meeting, he/she is suspended for the rest of the meeting. The chair-person will mark down that person his / her name, and discuss the matter with all the spokespersons that are still in the meeting. If there is disquiet in the meeting to bring someone back who has been suspended, the chair person will suspend the meeting temporarily and deal with the problem, either by bringing that person back immediately, or by threatening to suspend the disquiet members as well. This matter is only handled like this once, after that all must put the suspension matter out of their mind and focus on the meeting. The suspended person will get filled in with the details later and so on. If the chair-person thinks it is wise to ask about someone leaving, the chair person will ask the concerning grouplet spokesperson. - Order: the chair person can always ask all the grouplet spokesperson to come together to discuss a matter of order, while the meeting is in session (quiet, orderly). - Drinking and or eating. People who want to get drinking and or eating must take it without disrupting the meeting. - People who need to be away from the meeting for a short period will notify their grouplet spokesperson quietly and then leave quietly without disrupting the meeting. The meeting will not look at these things because that could also disrupt the meeting. The meeting ignores these individual quiet comings and leavings. If necessary, maybe someone is stuck in a position and trying to wiggle out, the chair person will shortly suspend the meeting informally if the activity draws attention, by saying something like "does someone need to help you." If the disorder is too bad and can't be condoned (laughing, yelling, running, throwing) the chair person will smack the block and demand the activity be completed and order is restored. If a spokesperson wants to leave he / she notifies the chair person with a hand gesture. The chair-person will then find a good moment to suspend the meeting shortly, until spokesperson is back. When the chair-person him/her self needs to leave, he/she will suspend for a short period. If the spokesperson needs an immediate suspension he /she will stand up making a gesture to the chair person to suspend, and then the chair person will immediately suspend shortly. This means that the spokespersons have a role of power, they can suspend the meeting for any reason. The spokespersons can use this mechanism also to create a moment where all spokespersons can meet with the chair person, to discuss an urgent matter of order. A good hand gesture is to close the hand, hold the arm half stretched in front horizontally, and have the palm of the hand face upwards and the backside downwards. Like the spokesperson "closes the meeting in his hand." The spokesperson stands up to show he / she is serious. The spokesperson can keep standing until the chair-person suspends the meeting. If the chair person does not suspend the meeting the spokesperson has a right to be upset, make noise and leave. At that point the whole meeting must refuse to continue with the meeting, order is suspended. The chair person has made a mistake in that case. The spokespersons will come together, take the hammer and block and council chair person title away from the chair person, and give the title to someone else. If the council comes to quiet after this, the new chair person is quietly accepted for the duration of the meeting. This means the chairperson must take the spokespersons who wish to adjourn the meeting absolutely serious. To not take the spokespersons serious is to show great disrespect to the whole council and the concerning grouplet. Such a person can not be a chair person. In neither of all these cases does the chair person specify the reason for the suspension, but merely say: "council is suspended momentarily," or "council is suspended for a brief period." No reason is given. In short: the ordinary members can come and leave quietly, the spokespersons and chair-persons not, the meeting must be suspended. Both the spokespersons and chair-person have the right to cause a short suspension for whatever reason, personal or general, and the reason is never given in general statement. - The council when suspended is of course allowed to make noises and walk around as so on and so forth. The meeting continues by the chair person hitting the block. - The chair person tries to conduct the meeting with as much order as they need to function properly. It is not needed that the meetings are extremely orderly for the sake of order alone. To get them to do their job is in principle enough order. Too much order can make the councils boring, or not fun to participate, and so on, and that can also undermine the state system ! Hence, order as such is not a goal, getting the job done and having amusements while doing it that is the purpose. That is more stable then absolute order. - Sitting arrangement: In many cases it might not be possible to form one giant circle. In that case it may be best if people who are speaking always stand up to speak. In a circle everyone can see each other sitting reasonably well, when sitting in rows for example that is obviously not the case. The chair person would need a place where he / she can be seen by all, and the spokespersons would ideally sit near / among their grouplet. A problem with seating arrangements where not all can see all, is that you'd neither see the wooden sheets with colors. Hence if someone wants to show he/she wants to talk he/she might have to hold his/her sign above his/her head (and so on). - Talking order for grouplet spokespersons can also be something else then seniority. For example it makes sense that if a proposal originated first from a certain grouplet, that this grouplet spokesperson can address the issue first, as proposing it in general. The chair-person ought to decide this. - Public at meetings should always be quiet, and not voice opinions, not even have signs with them. This is because there is no way all the people can be present, the whole public can not be present at once. Only a small snippet can, and if they try to influence the council and succeed, then that is not democracy. The chair-person must immediately order to remove public if they start to make noises about content and so no. But well behaved public must not be removed because ill behaved public needs to be removed. To remove well behaved public is against the meetings being public, the right of the people to know all there is to know about these meetings, which are being conducted in their interest and on their behalf. - Election of chair person. When the council first meets they do not yet have had the ability to elect a chair person, hence: who maintains order until that election has taken place ? One solution is: the council will find its chairs and sit down, have something to eat and drink in hand. Then the council attempts to find the oldest women that is part of the council, if no women are part of the council then the oldest man. The council makes that person the emergency or secondary, or vice-chairperson. That person, if really unwilling to serve as chair person, will appoint someone who is willing to serve as chair person as her assistant secondary chair person. But nobody should pressure this vice-chairperson to give up his/her position (too much). At that point someone willing is found to chair the meeting, he / she opens the meeting by saying "I am the vice chair person" or "I am the secondary chair person" and "I am opening this meeting in order to elect a council chair person" then: "who wants to stand for election for chair person ?" Then the persons who want to serve and chair person at that moment stand up (people who do not have the courage to stand up at that point, may not be good chair persons later.) The vice-chair person then says: "come forward." These people come forward and stand on a row for the council. The vice chair person stands up and writes down the number of votes and says "who votes for this one" while pointing to the first one. The vice chair person carefully counts all the votes. The persons who stand for election are also allowed to vote on the other candidates of course, and the person standing for election is also counted as one vote, unless that person makes it clear that he / she does not vote for himself. The person who is then the acting chair person can also stand for election to be the chair person. For that purpose he / she also stands up when the vice chairperson asks all candidates to stand up. The vice chair person then offers him / her-self for election after all the votes for the other candidates have been taken. Then the votes are found and chances are good a chair person is found. If nobody steps forward to be elected as chair person, then the acting vice chair person becomes the chair person. If two persons gather the same amount of votes to be chair person, then the oldest of them will do that meeting, and the next oldest will do the next meeting on another day, and so on to the youngest. If seniority can not be decided, before the council a coin is flipped or a dice is rolled, and it is determined that way by chance who will do what meeting, in what order. These acting chair persons will rotate the chair person position between themselves, until the council decides they want to have another chair person election. If the council has not decided to elect in the same way as a chair person, a vice chair person, and maybe a third and fourth chair persons (?), then when the chosen chair person is not present at a meeting of the council, the oldest person in the entire council, man or women, not already elected to be chair person, will be the emergency chair person. The emergency chair person will either be chair person him or herself, or appoint someone willing. The emergency chair person will then open the meeting and first ask: "does the council want to elect a chair person for this meeting." If the council wants to, then it proceeds to elect someone in the same way as above for the chair person. It is precisely the same thing as before, but the election is only good until the officially chosen chair person returns. In this way it must always be possible to determine someone as chairing the meetings even without having held formal elections yet. This can be very important because when there is disorder, there is a serious chance that the roughest and loudest people will be able to shout and rough their way to power; or a small group of people will be able to dominate proceedings right from the start. - Chair person wants to vote. If the chair person wishes to partake in a discussion and voting, then that chair person must temporarily be relieved. Ideally an already elected and present vice chair person takes over. If none present then the procedure as if the chair person is already elected but not present (because it is not a good idea to have that chair person then appoint a temporary replacement over a debate about content, which would give the chair person too much power.) Chair person can say, if no elected vice chair person is present: "who wants to be chair person for the next issue," or "who wants to be chair person for the remainder of the meeting." If only one person comes forward and the council remains quiet, then that person takes over. If multiple persons come forward, and they can not resolve the problem immediately then it becomes necessary to formally elect a vice chair person. For example two persons come forward but one says "ok, you do it," or "ok, you do it first half, I'll take second," or something like that, which would be quick and easy. But if that is not possible, then it must be a complete voting procedure. If nobody steps forward then responsibility reverts to the oldest man or women, or whomever that person appoints, with the acquiescence of the council. If the council objects to a non-elected chair person with disquiet, then obviously that non-elected chair person can not chair the meeting, and a complete election has to follow. This is always the case with formally non-elected chair persons. Normally the chair person speaks through the spokesperson of his/her grouplet, like the other members of that grouplet. The spokesperson knows the opinions in his/her grouplet from previous discussions. - Meeting crisis. If such a non-elected (oldest, or appointed) emergency chair person is met with disquiet disapproval of his / her taking that job, then that is a meeting crisis. Because then there is no chair person, no order even to elect one: a crisis. The members who wish order for the meeting and to accept the emergency chair person for the moments it is needed, they can stand up, be quiet and have their arms crossed into each other, with either hand in the other elbow (not on the shoulder, which would be weird.) They will simply stand there in a kind of relaxed way, and in this way threaten those that are disquiet to be quiet. They stand behind the chair person this way. If a majority are thus behind the chair person, then the chair person can call the meeting to order. If not a majority stands behind the chair person then that means the council at that point is unable to form due to disorder. The council must then say to itself: "we try another day, give it a few days." The members who stood behind the chair person will remain quiet, sit down and/or leave, but they will then prevent together that the meeting proceeds that day. It then becomes an informal gathering with something to eat and drink, not that wrong either way. The idea is not to fracture that sense of order that has been achieved, not to break people apart even more then they already where. Many members who where in disorder may not even know what the whole council business is about. By talking informally between each other, and sleeping on it a few days, chances are very good that another day the council can proceed without any problems and in pristine and perfect order. Many people will initially assume that if they do not shout and yell and are disorderly, then their voices will get crushed like they usually have been. They may not yet know that the councils are there to listen to their voices. If the council is unable to form, or if a crisis breaks out at any other point causing a break down of that council at that point, then this must always be seen initially as a temporary set back. It must not lead to yelling, accusations, or even fighting. When the council has broken down formally, then much reason to be upset is also gone. That means debates and relations can normalize a bit again, at which point it may be decided by members to for example try to form different councils, or do this or that differently next time. If there is some kind of violence breaking out, then the next meeting must be scheduled for a different location. After having abandoned the original location at least once to protest the violence and physically leave it, the council can decide to come back there the third time (or not). - Chaos at the council: If two times after each other a meeting crisis breaks out, that is mass disquiet and inability to maintain order, not enough members standing for order or these members not being physically able to establish order, then there is a state of chaos in that council. When there is a state of chaos in a council, then the council members must abandon at that point their attempt to establish that council. They can henceforth proceed with those members only who stood with order and who where not disquiet, etc. This would mean it could be necessary to not allow certain people to join that council at that point, which may not be legally possible. But what the council might do is to make a list of persons who are permanently suspended for order from the council. Meaning: they could be part of that council, but they are just never allowed to be at the council because of their disorderly conduct (in case they do want to join that council, even if most people in that council want they'd rather not). Reason would then say, such suspended members must at some point be given a chance to come back into the council, until they again cause disorder. Meaning the suspension would not be permanent but for a time period: days, weeks, month's, years, or a number of years etc. Otherwise it is not reasonable to say that person is a member of that council if it is permanently suspended. In some cases it may be legal to reject members, but the Constitution Proposal has it that delegates who are unable to form a council for lack of numbers must mutually accept becoming part of other councils (3.1.d-2). Hence it is not possible just like that to reject delegates, it may be a Constitutional obligation to accept them. But who can reasonably accept the presence of delegates who cause chaos in the council by their own disruptive behavior ? Why do they even need to be at the council if their presence destroys that council its operations. By being at the council and disrupting it, they'd end the council. In that sense it might become a case for law enforcement, `disallowing people to organize politically,' for example (2.1.c). With them out of the way physically through law enforcement, even if part of a council, the council might become orderly. - Electing grouplet spokespersons. This is a matter of majority vote in each grouplet. The grouplets are strongly urged to select someone who can handle this responsibility well, and if they do not have someone like that to attempt to get someone. A grouplet can ask for help with this from other grouplet spokespersons and the chair person, for example, and/or other people with experience in meetings and so on. A grouplet of about 10 persons is so small that it should really be able to maintain order for itself and choose chair persons for their meetings and who writes things down and so on. Remember that these are not laws, although they could be turned into formal laws by the council(s) (unless the national council forbids that kind of law making, which is its Constitutional power, see Constitution). The Constitution proposal only says to have a name, minimum number of persons to be a council, having a chair-person, agenda 7 days general issues and 2 month laws, and to decide by majority vote. All the above are merely methods to make things more orderly if they are too disorderly. It can also help to make the meetings more pleasant, and to undermine the power of the chair-person to prevent it from blowing up out of all proportions (such as that the chair-person would become a dictator and the rest controlled puppets; that is reasonably unlikely to happen with smaller groups, and with power resting with the group, and that the chair-person is denied the vote; point to watch for: is the chair-person the boss in matters of order, or content - it should only be the meeting order, not content). See also http://www.socialism.nl/post/002/107-military-struggle (at (near the bottom): Other uses of the Army) http://www.socialism.nl/post/003/2010-05-06_DA---_--_en (Centralized Democracy)