3 ms·

Rough consensus is a really naive solution to making decisions. Being in a flat structure doesn't change the fact that different people have different requireme

• Drdrdrq 7y ago
  Did you read the article? The whole point is not to seek agreement, but a few proponents (authors) and no fundamental flaws.
• kradroy 7y ago
  Decision making is fraught with lack of knowledge and uncertainty. I favor rough consensus. Face it - you're never going to get the best or "right" solution in most cases or practically ever. It's good enough to get something that most people involved think will work. I emphasize "involved" because there are always individuals who don't really care about the decision at inception. They sometimes complain if the idea doesn't work out, but then you can point back to the discussion and tell them they had a time and place to give their input. I feel exercise of decision making is mostly about having stakeholders be aware that a topic is being discussed and making a space for open discussion. The outcome of the decision is largely irrelevant.
• rocqua 7y ago
  As per the article. Rough consensus means everyone states "I can live with this solution". This is contrasted against the majority stating "I have no objections against this solution". The idea is to not get bogged down in 'I think this is fine but X is better' discussions, and only deal with 'I think this is actually bad' discussions. Because any discussion is very long, and the first kind of objection is not severe enough to warrant a lot of discussion. See also the concept of 'bikeshed-ing'
• deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]