Re: Characteristics of Intentional Communities
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
I was going to reply to this in our next chat, but thought I would send it to the group instead in order to see if it would stimulate some additional discussion.
There is no reason Mirador Astronomy Village (MAV) could not accommodate several versions of the "spectrum" in the different housing areas - Campsite (tent to RV), "Hotel", Dorm, Apartment, Private Residence, etc. ....
Please explain the "Spiritualty" and "Energy" spectrums.
What does it mean to be less than tolerant of spiritualty?
What is "Energy", in this context?
Here is my point of view regarding the others (based on the L.C. model and my experience living in an IC):
Income Sharing - Yes!... in that I would prefer as a resident to be able to be a shareholder of the site ownership corporation which operates at a profit from multiple reliable revenue streams - to the point of never needing additional income.
High Resource Sharing - Yes. I only want private access to my personal bedroom and attached bathroom (I will Email you a floor plan), I'm good with sharing everything else. And, I would even consider dorm style (bunk and a locker), if all the necessary public health design features, policies, and procedures were in place..
Cost to join - varies from your security deposit/monthly rent to shareholder.
Create a new "Urban" in a rural setting. But really... MAV is a primarily a remote residential Science Station.
Mission Driven, at a high quality of life (which I expect is defined differently by everyone).
Inwardly Focused in the permanent residence (P.R.) section. Outwardly Focused in the public areas, and as part of the education mission. Residents can then operate in their chosen mode at any given time.
Optimized for 72 P.R. (144 max. cap. - which is consistent with the approx. limits of Dunbar's Number).
Designed and built MAV so that all essential functions/critical systems can be operated at an extreme Low Tech level, then overlay up to Highest Tech for cutting edge "bells and whistles".
Radical Appeal for sure. I want to live in a remote Experimental Science Station. Mainstream is already available.
Voting is possibly the worst form of decision making ever (however, it cam be used effectively as an opinion survey device). It breeds division and resentment immediately, which compounds infamously over time. A contractual community does not require most of the conventional "decision making" processes. I would suggest unanimous consent be required in order to change the terms of the contract. There are some functions within a community that, at times, require competent leadership. This is a long conversation topic. (See the Organizational Chart.)
I'm presuming the "Power" spectrum has to do with control. Again, in a consensual contract community, there is little need for the conventional "power" structures. (This is another long discussion.)
Conflict Resolution is situational. It depends... and is most effectively dealt with differently, if for example the conflict (non-physical) is between two (or more) members of a camping party or... the conflict (physical) is between Board Members at an organized meeting. You need plans for the different situations. (See the Policies and Procedures Manual.) The entire community should rarely (if ever) be needed for Conflict Resolution.
In the L.C model there is both an on-site Counselor (permanent staff position in the Heath Department) and a formal Conflict Resolution Committee (as part of the Department of Administration. See Organizational Chart).
Rational Rules-based. All relationships work better when rules are clearly defined and agreed to. (See Contract and Consensus). Science is about learning the rules. Society is then about choosing to live by them.
On Tuesday, May 19, 2020, 05:56:07 PM CDT, David Oesper via groups.io <oesper@...> wrote:
Every intentional community has attributes that fall somewhere along various community characteristic spectra. Yana Ludwig shared the following "Spectrums for Community Visioning" during her recent webinar, "How to Start an Intentional Community". Below each "spectrum" is my suggestion for where Mirador Astronomy Village should be placed. Comments and suggestions welcome!
Income Sharing % Tithing Independent Finances
High Resource Sharing Low Resource Sharing
In the middle somewhere
No cost to join High cost to join
Low cost to join
Spiritually Same Spiritually Diverse Supports Spirituality Tolerates Spirituality Secular Intolerant of Spirituality
Mission Driven Member Quality of Life Driven
In the middle somewhere, but much closer to Member Quality of Life Driven
Inwardly Focused Outwardly Focused
In the middle somewhere
Family Size (4-6) Village Size (500+)
In the middle somewhere, say around 50-100 people
Low Technology Use High Technology Use
High Technology Use
Mainstream Appeal Radical Appeal
In the middle somewhere, but slightly closer to Radical Appeal
Deep Alignment Consensus Voting Small Decision Group Sole Leader
Consensus would be my preference, but maybe Voting. Perhaps a hybrid of the two depending on the type of issue.
Flat Power Dispersed Power Strong Pockets of Power Very Lopsided
Strong Group Role in Conflict Resolution Group Hands Off with Conflict Resolution
In the middle somewhere
In the middle somewhere, closer to Relationally-based
"Moving Toward" Energy "Resisting" Energy
"Moving Toward" Energy