I'm glad this thread has popped up but a little sad that there hasn't been much discussion. So, I'll wade into the waters. My perspectives on group conscience has changed the longer I'm in service. I'm sure that I used to think simple majority was a good enough indication that an issue should pass or fail. However, having been at the rodeo for some time now, my thinking has changed. On simple issues I still see the merit in simple majority voting but the more I consider the 12 concepts, concensus(sp) based decision making, and group conscience the more I see where in "larger" issues a simple majority is not a clear indicator of god's will or the fellowship's. My belief is that when we have clear division of the voting participants that is actually an indicator that the issue may need more discussion, research, or no action at all at that time. Ponder this, if we all have the best interests of the fellowship at heart and we all share that common purpose, then what does it mean if an issue only passes with couple of votes that makes it a majority? Or if we are tied in the vote? I'm reminded of the 9th concept specifically in these instances. If my thoughts were on the prevailing side, I wonder what information the opposing participants had or needed that directed them to vote differently from my own. Just some thoughts.