03 May How We Do It: Consensus Process (Full Document)

In case they can be useful, or maybe just interesting to the process nerds out there, we’re gonna start sharing some of the core documents we’ve created over the years to run Lupinewood.

This one started as a zine about consensus process, originally made by Andrew and updated a dozen times since it’s inception. It’s the system we’ve been using to make decisions at weekly collective meetings for the last almost-ten years.

Consensus Process
Lupinewood Collective | 03-02-2026 v12

Consensus decision-making is a horizontal process that prioritizes addressing the concerns of everyone involved before moving forward with a decision.

Informal Consensus Process

Most decisions are made using informal proposals which are decided on through discussion and active facilitation.

When an informal proposal is made by a collective member, the facilitator makes space for discussion of the proposal. After talking it through the facilitator asks for a “temperature check,” where each collective member indicates their agreement, neutrality/mixed-feelings, or disagreement through hand gestures. If everyone in the group responds with agreement, then the informal proposal has passed. Otherwise, more discussion is needed before it can pass, either then or at a future meeting.

Formal Consensus Process

A formal consensus process starts when a collective member makes a formal proposal, or asks the meeting facilitator to use the formal consensus process for an informal proposal that’s being discussed. During the process the facilitator uses stack and other consensus tools (see Glossary below).

In formal consensus:

a) The member making the proposal explains it thoroughly to the rest of the collective.

b) The collective asks any clarifying questions of the member(s) about the proposal

c) Other members of the collective express any concerns they have about the proposal.

d) The collective discusses the proposal thoroughly.

e) Collective members make amendments to the proposal from ideas that came up during discussion, if there are any. The member who made the proposal accepts or rejects these amendments as they are presented, after any necessary discussion.

f) The facilitator does a “temperature check” on how the collective is feeling about the proposal. At that point the member who made the proposal may choose either to have the collective vote on the proposal or to table it for future discussion.

g) If the proposal makes it to a vote, the facilitator asks first who consents, then who stands aside, and finally who has blocking concerns about the proposal (more on these stances below). Using a show of hands, the facilitator tallies the votes of members, which are in turn recorded by the note-taker.

To pass, a proposal can have up to two stand-asides, assuming the rest of the collective is consenting. A proposal is not passed if there are more than two stand-asides, or any number of blocks.

Tabled and Blocked Formal Proposals

If a proposal doesn’t pass for whatever reason, the collective member making the proposal can work to address the issues that led to it not passing if they want to, in turn making a modified proposal to the group at a later date.

If a proposal has been blocked in a formal consensus process three times over the course of three months, then passing requirements drop to a three-quarter majority rule: If three quarters of the collective consents to the proposal with no stand-asides then it passes regardless of any remaining blocks.

Glossary

To consent means anything from 100% enthusiastic agreement to feeling complicated but still thinking a proposal should move forward.

To stand aside means disagreeing with a proposal personally but being willing to move ahead anyway, because of how it could benefit the collective as a whole.

To block, or have blocking concerns, is to believe a proposal runs contrary to the fundamental character and intentions of the collective, threatens the ability of the collective to continue as a project project, or creates an intolerable situation for the collective member as an individual.

The facilitator is the person chosen to facilitate the meeting or discussion at hand. They are responsible for following up with absent members to seek their input or consent, and for following the process as laid out in this document.

The note-taker refers to the person chosen to take notes about the discussion, decisions, and action steps of a meeting.

Stack is the facilitation technique of keeping track of who is speaking next so as to ensure everyone gets a chance to talk in group discussions. Members raise their hands to get on stack in between other people’s turns so as not to interrupt them. Then, one by one, the facilitator runs down the order of speakers until stack is empty. Members can get on stack any number of times in a given discussion.

Hand gestures are used in Lupinewood’s consensus decision-making process as an aid to group communication. They can be used mid-conversation as they’re less disruptive than speech:

AGREEMENT is signaled by raising one or both hands, palms out and in an upright position while fluttering your fingers.

NEUTRALITY/MIXED-FEELINGS is signaled by putting one or both hands in front of your body, palms down while fluttering your fingers.

DISAGREEMENT is signaled by putting one or both hands in front of your body and dropping them towards the ground, palms facing back towards you while fluttering your fingers.

CLARIFYING QUESTION is a gesture made by holding up one hand in the shape of the letter C. It interrupts stack, and at times someone speaking, in order to ask a practical question that the person needs answered in order to understand what’s being said.

POINT OF INFORMATION is a gesture made by holding up the index finger on one hand. It interrupts stack, and at times someone speaking, in order to relay practical information that’s essential to something being said.

POINT OF PROCESS is a gesture made by holding both hands in front of your body, palms out and in an upright position, and thumbs and forefingers touching each other, forming a triangle shape. It interrupts whatever is happening and gets used to address problems with the process, such as stack not being followed. It can be used to ask the facilitator to bring the conversation back on topic.