Accessibility Issue #13

Accessibility.md

@@ -0,0 +1,21 @@
+#Accessibility
+
+* Campaigns need to think about and plan for how to involve people from different backgrounds and with differing needs.
+* Strive to include people from different backgrounds and differing physical abilities in your leadership, as movements are shaped by those who lead them.
+* Don't neglect age as a focus of diversity. Many activist communities represent a very narrow age spectrum -- focus on including a larger group of ages to bring more perspectives to the table.
+
+#Events
+
+* Plan to address these needs as early in the event-planning cycle as possible, to allow enough time to make any requested accommodations.
+* Include language in your promotional materials that the event would like to be inclusive and accessible, and invite participants with disabilities to contact you with any accommodation requests.
+* Here are some suggested ways to ensure a more accessible event from the outset:
+  * Choose venues that are wheelchair-accessible, including ramps to get to the auditorium or other venues. Be sure that cafeterias or other food venues are similarly accessible.
+  * Presentations can be made more accessible to participants who are blind or who have low vision by ensuring that no content is presented only through the slide medium, or by making visual content prepared in an alternate format (Braille, electronic text format, large print).
+  * Presentation or film content should be captioned or interpreted for participants who are deaf or hard of hearing.
+  * Make sure all event staff are coached and able to address important questions such as where accessible parking or restrooms are located.
+  * Ensure that all spaces allow safe movement, by being well-lit and free of obstructions, such as bunched carpeting.
+  * Make events free or pay-what-you-can to increase economic accessibility.
+
+#Conclusion
+
+* Remember, the effort it takes to focus on inclusiveness will lead to a stronger activist community.

README.md

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 # Activism Framework
 
-A collaboratively developed framework for planning activist campaigns, started at MozFest 2015. This project aims to provide a shared resource for anyone approaching the task of planning a new activist campaign. 
+A collaboratively developed framework for planning activist campaigns, started at MozFest 2015. This project aims to provide a shared resource for anyone approaching the task of planning a new activist campaign.
 
 __Share your experiences and views of campaigning by opening a pull request or creating an issue on this repository - all contributions welcome!__
 
@@ -15,6 +15,7 @@ Elements to think about when planning a campaign:
 * legitimacy
 * scaleability
 * [organization](Organization.md)
+* [accessibility](Accessibility.md)
 * timeline
 * experiences / rationale
 * resources

decision-making.md

@@ -1,15 +1,39 @@
 #Decision-making
 
-There are at least two popular aproaches:
-* Do-ocracy is an organizational way where every individual chooses own role and/or task and does it autonomously or in a team. But accontability sticks to actor who implement task/role but not who is officially assigned. 
-  * The main advantages of this approach: big motivation and rapid implementation. 
-  * Disadvantages are burn out of team core.
-* Consensus is an organizational approach where decisions are made by agreement of a whole group of actors. 
-  * Benefits are sustainibility and deep understanding tack and roles by each member of collective. 
-  * Drawbacks: Very time consuming and not flexible. 
+There are several popular approaches to decision-making, some of which are detailed here:
+* Do-ocracy is an organizational methodology where each individual chooses his/her own role and/or task and does it autonomously or in a team. In this model, accountability sticks to the actor who implements a task/role, not who is officially assigned.
+  * Advantages:
+    * Fosters a culture of participation and motivates community members to take on responsibilities for the good of the group.
+    * Can lead to much more rapid implementation, as there is little in the way of process to curtail progress on tasks.
+    * Allows those who want to accomplish something to simply start working toward their goals.
+  * Disadvantages:
+    * Burnout of team core, especially when people volunteer for too many jobs/tasks.
+    * If some key contributors volunteer for a large portion of the tasks, they may begin to resent others for not contributing as much.
+    * Some may volunteer to perform a task without the required expertise to complete it, yet there may be no mechanism for taking the volunteer off that self-assigned task.
+* Consensus is an organizational approach where decisions are made by the unanimous agreement of a whole group of actors.
+  * Advantages:
+    * Reduces social hierarchy, as all members' votes are required to progress forward.
+    * Increases participation by all members of a group.
+    * Imposes a natural limit on risky or controversial changes.
+    are sustainability and deep understanding tack and roles by each member of collective.
+    * Prevents minority viewpoints within a group from being overrun.
+  * Disadvantages:
+    * Extremely time-consuming, as a single dissenter can prevent forward progress.
+    * Difficult to overturn previously-made decisions as members who espoused those ideas initially may be unwilling to recant.
+    * Can cause social pressure on all participants to reach quicker decisions, paradoxically resulting in some groups speeding too quickly toward decision-making.
+    * Parliamentary Procedure is a highly organized system of decision-making, governed by a fixed set of rules (such as Robert's Rules of Order).
+      * Advantages:
+        * Highly structured set of rules governs discussion, preventing personal attacks and the like from becoming commonplace, and reducing ambiguity.
+        * Generally requires a quorum of members present, to prevent the risk of a clandestine meeting held to push through a small group's agenda.
+        * Majority voting provides a clear, objective way to measure when a decision has been reached when a question is called to a vote.
+      * Disadvantages:
+        * Minority viewpoints can be overridden by votes, leading to a situation where an unscrupulous majority group could seize complete control over the body.
+        * Discussion can become interrupted by the process moving too quickly to a vote.
+        * People may feel less personally invested in the outcome from the other two systems (especially where they voted against the decision that was reached).
 
-**Option: The better way is to combine the methods.
 
 ##References
 * https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Do-ocracy
 * https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consensus
+* http://meatballwiki.org/wiki/ConsensusDecisionMaking
+* https://communitywiki.org/wiki/ParliamentaryProcedure