Consent

What can the you tolerate?

Consent comes from Latin con- meaning 'together' and sentire meaning 'feel'. It is defined here as the absence of disagreement.

Consent may be perceived explicitly (each participant actively stating they have no disagreement) or implicitly (qui tacet consentire videtur, "he who is silent is taken to agree"). Consent decision making methods must therefore provide a way for participants to express their disagreement and ensure that disagreement prevents a decision. This is most commonly achieved with the inclusion of veto.

Veto is Latin for 'I forbid'. It allows one person to block an active decision from being made, resulting in a to maintain the status quo. Veto can expressed by verbally, by hand gesture or by a special voting option.

Veto was traditionally reserved for positions in high authority where oligarchic rule had transitioned to more democratic systems. Contemporary consent decision making is more commonly found in activist groups, intentional communities and small organizations where all participants have the ability to veto.

Rick Falkvinge describes one consent method used during the founding years of the Swedish Pirate Party in his book Swarmwise (pg 165-169). The following method was reportedly used by a group of 25 people and led to a decision after two rounds of talking:

"Everybody takes turns speaking about what is important to him or her about the issue, under a time limit of sixty seconds. ... Everybody can spend his or her sixty seconds however he or she likes ... and may not be interrupted by anyone during that time slot. ... [speaking continues] going in a circle ... until everybody is in agreement on the issue at hand.

... everybody has the power of veto over a final decision. ... it forces everybody to find a solution that is acceptable to everybody, and ... slowly releases all fears of leaving the room as a loser ..."

This is a relatively simple version, but there are many different formats. Some really focus on the conversation, guiding and forming it through various stages to try and foster coherence one example being this guide by Seeds for Change. A voting system which provides the option for each participant to veto any option would also be considered a consent decision making process.

Advantages of consent

The first set of advantages are due to the fact that most consent decision making methods are based on conversation:

• Bonding. Conversation typically brings people closer together. Details not directly relating to the topic are shared which help people understand each others views - many things cannot be conveyed through paper.

The second set of advantages are due to the presence of veto:

• No pressure. A sense of security is created in participants as they can stop any proposal from going ahead that they strongly object due to the ability to veto...
• Education. Since any proposal can be blocked, there is an onus on the proposer to make sure that everyone understands their proposal and their line of thought.

Disadvantages of consent

The first set of disadvantages are due to the fact that most consent decision making methods are based on conversation:

• Coercion. With group awareness and moderation, verbal coercion can be minimized. However, it is always possible for a speaker to unduly influence opinion through a variety of methods including...
• Anchoring. Conversations are greatly influenced by ideas and proposals made at the beginning. As such, those who speak nearer the beginning often have greater influence than those who speak later.
• Scalability. There is a temporal-physical limit to how many people you can fit in a room and have each of them talk and be listened too...
• Length. Talking can take a long time, even in small groups, partly due to...
• Inflation. Dialogue is typically a generative and creative process: conversation often leads to more proposals than eliminating fewer.

The second set of disadvantages are due to the presence of veto:

• Malicious blocking. Since an individual need not justify their decision to block, they may block proposals to push forward a personal agenda, especially if it is in their interest to maintain the status quo...
• Stasis. The more people that participate, the more likely options are to be blocked and the more likely the status quo will be maintained.

NB: Consent is defined differently when having sex with someone or signing a contract, active agreement from all parties is.