The founders of Twin Oaks faced a dilemma. They could see the faults of a voting based democratic decision system, but did not want to have to wait for every single person in the group to agree. It was 1967, the feminists had not yet taken the consensus process from the Quakers, secularized it and released it onto progressive moments across the land.
If the magic threshold number is not 50% plus 1 person nor 100% what is it? We could not choose a number, instead we chose a process. It would be wrong to call it a “super majority” because the exact threshold is not fixed. What i clumsily call it is “negative minority centric”. But what does this actually mean?
If you get 24 accept votes to become a member after your visitor period and you get 6 rejects, you get rejected. That hardly seems fair, but with membership decisions this is easier to justify. We get a lot of visitors and the average Oaker has lived here about 8 years, which means they have seen perhaps 500 visitors, plus an uncountable number of guests. If you have seen that many visitors when you get a little input slip in your 3 x 5 slot requesting you give your input on these people who were just here for three weeks, you think back and say “Oh, i did one tofu shift with them and they were pleasant at a lunch at the fun table, they would probably be a good member.”
But the 6 reject votes the membership team is reading are saying things like “Was a disaster in the garden, pulled up vegetables instead of weeds” and “told an off color joke at the party and kept interrupting everyone, bad sense of boundaries” and “i have concerns about the amount of alcohol they consumed during the visitor period and i think they might have addiction issues”. And thus the membership team will choose to reject them, or tell them visit again.
Part of the problem is that Twin Oaks is so large that we don’t do what Acorn and most smaller communities do and gather together as a group and discuss membership applications. Partly we don’t do this because it would be terribly time consuming. We had a visitor period last year where we had 9 people applying for membership. If it took 20 minutes on average to discuss each of these people (which would be quite short in some cases) and there were 90 members (which has been the average membership for the past several years), that would be 270 person hours of membership decision making.
So we pay attention to the “super majority”.