Firstly, the forum is not compulsory - if you have and interest in deciding issues concerning the CMWC, you should come. But before you come to the forum, you should have reviewed and seriously thought about the agenda items, which you will have received either through the mail or email before the event, or picked up when you signed in at registration upon arrival. Either way, it is your responsibility to have formulated your ideas prior to the forum, as time is precious, and we're here to discuss, not wait for late arrivals to catch up. The forum on the agenda as written will take place after the big collective meal on Sunday night, at a venue to be announced. Those of you who will not be able to attend are encouraged to relay any thoughts on the agenda to the rest of us through an intermediary. If at any time during the forum it is felt to be neccessary, we can take a break if the proceedings are becoming overly lengthy.
At this forum, we will be using the consensus method for reaching decisions. This means that we will not be taking votes of any kind. Whilst it is recognised that this may seem to be a rather long-winded way of taking decisions, we feel that it is the only satisfactory way of proceeding because it enables maximum participation by all, thus giving the minority a voice. The consensus method challenges conventional so-called democratic process, in which the majority enforce their views on the minority. Some of you may question the reasoning behind using this method, but remember that there's no room for complaint down the line on a decision we have made in this manner - it's better to leave a decision unmade that to leave the forum dissatisfied and grumbling about it. That being said, it is a rigorous process - you need the discipline to listen to others without interrupting, and the self-control to be able to speak concisely on the points being discussed so there is no need for interruption.
There are four possible responses to proposed decisions:
1. Agree Self-explanatory.
Plenary The whole group.
Facilitator A person who makes sure that everyone's voice is heard, and smoothens communication. Not to be confused with a chairperson or moderator.
If the plenary numbers more than 15 people, it will be neccessary to split up into work groups of 10 people or less to consider the agenda items. Each work group should mirror the plenary in composition with regard to the nationality and gender as closely as possible (ie if there are 80 US, 20 Canadians, 40 Germans, 10 Danish, 10 English and 40 Japanese present, then each work group should consist of 4 US, 1 Canadian, 2 Germans etc.) Each work group should appoint a facilitator to aid and smoothen the decision making process within the work group. The work group facilitators must give every member of the work group the opportunity to express an opinion on each of the agenda items. It is also the responsibility of the work groups to reach consensus on the agenda items within the alloted timespan. The work groups must also appoint a spokesperson to report the decisions of their work group back to the plenary, and a note taker to record the progress made.
The plenary, assisted by the facilitator, then receives the reports of the work groups on the agenda items. The facilitator will identify the items on which the plenary has not reached consensus (ie the items which the reports from the work groups do not all agree on) and attempt to reconcile the differing points of view. If this is not possible, then the plenary will return to the work groups and see if they can acheive consensus, returning to the plenary to report after a fixed period. If, after a periond of conciliation, consensus on an item cannot be reached, then a decision can not be taken.
After consideration of the agenda in the final plenary, the facilitator will take the plenary through the agenda and indicate what the final decisions are. At this point the forum will be closed.