There are fundamental differences in the way the decision-making process is carried out when reaching a conclusion via majority rule versus when an agreement is negotiated through consensus. Majority rule and consensus each have their own set of benefits and obstacles, and each is impacted by unique social factors and political considerations.

A consensus requires that a group reach a decision that has been agreed on by a collective. In order for the decision to be fully supported going forward, it is necessary that all group members participate in the decision-making process, including those with minority opinions.

The majority rule does not require that the group comes to any agreements or compromises. The decision of the group is decided according to whom or what receives a majority of votes.

Consensus, a democratic decision-making process, necessitates that group members engage in a dialogue and share information for the purpose of increasing others’ understanding of the issues and providing a rationale for choosing a particular position. By including the whole of the group in the discussion and decision-making process, everyone becomes invested. If only some group members participate, it is more likely that only those who were the biggest advocates would continue to provide support for a decision. To reach a consensus, there has to be a context or environment created that is conducive to respectful dialogue and the healthy exchange of ideas. There should be mutual respect, a common vision, or shared principles between group members in order for the group to succeed in reaching a worthwhile consensus.

The majority rule does not require the same level of interpersonal communication. It is a democratic process that ultimately comes down to simple mathematics. Since there is only a matter of counting votes, decisions can be reached much more quickly with the majority rule.

In DAOs and more specifically in Bankless DAO and the Translators Guild we heavily prioritize consensus over the majority rule, in an attempt to keep all the members aligned. On a Guild level, the decision-making process follows a certain process that aims to reach consensus before the issue/proposal in question ends up in a poll for voting.

Tempcheck -> written proposal -> discussion (Discord & Guild Call) -> Polling

Even though this process is followed, we have recently come across Polls that demonstrate a split in the Guild voters, which often creates confusion about the validity of the poll and the actual thoughts and intentions of the guild members. In order to address these situations and help in their resolution in a way that does not create tensions amongst the Guild members, and doesn’t leave the interpretation open, I suggest that we adopt a threshold of at least 75% for the YES/NO polls, as well as the ones with multiple proposals.

We have seen over the course of the last year that proposals and ideas that have the strong support of the Guild members pass almost unanimously and thus 75% is easily achievable if a proposal has the actual consensus of the Guild.

If a proposal fails to achieve the 75% during the polling phase should not be considered void but there should be a secondary procedure that the members submitting the proposal can take.

Opening a thread under the #translators-governance discord channel and revising the proposal, incorporating the comments and suggestions of members who objected/voted against the proposal, is advised. After a period of a minimum of 2 weeks that guarantees that every Guild member can add comments and suggestions to the proposal, the re-written/adjusted proposal can be polled again.