Imagine for a while that you’re a gourmet food critic. You enjoy the best of foods, and you require access to it in order to conduct your profession and hone your tastebuds. You have a carefully selected menu delivered to your home each day, and you’re very happy with how well it tastes.

Imagine now that the board of directors in the co-op you live in all of a sudden decide that everyone living there will have to eat the same thing, every day, for as long as you live there. What that meal will be is to be decided by a majority vote, and everyone will be allowed one vote. For each type of meal, statistics about that meal will be provided. Statistics such as how much the meal will cost you, what it tastes like and how it will be delivered.

Now, of course the majority of people will vote for the cheap (or very cheapest) meal. Most people don’t have a trained palate, most people don’t require expensive dinners and most will simply be happy if the meal dimishes their hunger and doesn’t obviously taste of dogshit. This of course leaves people like you in a bit of a bind. You don’t want the cheapest of meals, you want something that tastes good – yet you have no choice in the matter. Whatever the result of the vote, you’ll simply have to adapt or move out. Eat the crappy hamburger and like it, or move out.

This is an analogy for what is happening in my co-op. It’s not the residents dinner which is up for debate, it’s their choice of broadband supplier.

In fact, there isn’t even any vote. It’s already been decided, and I simply have to like it. Whatever “it” turns out to be, since nobody seems to have any information about it other than that it’s going to happen.

You see, when it comes to broadband I’m a gourmand. I want the best and I’m willing to pay for it. Yet this fundamental power of choice has been removed from me. Come the end of the year, I will be forced to change broadband-supplier to one who is admittedly a lot cheaper than my current, but which so far has supplied me with zero specifications. It’s essentially as if someone is forcing you to buy their car, yet refuses to disclose even the most basic information about it.

In my case, the co-op is going to get what’s called a “gruppanslutning”. Roughly translated, a group-connection. These type of things are fairly popular in Sweden, and essentially it’s where a somewhat large group of people get together and solicit a service from a company. The company agrees to a lower price, and in return they get a large influx of customers. The kicker is that these types of deals are always one-size-fits-all. There is no wiggle-room for individual needs.

And this is where the tyranny of groups come in play. The vast majority doesn’t care much about what type of “broadband” they get, as long as it’s dirt-cheap, allows them to check their email and is always on. They don’t have a clue about bandwidth restrictions, throughput or any other type of variable. Yet because the majority don’t care or are too (for lack of a better word) clueless, they will force more knowledgeable people to simply squeeze into the mold. One voice arguing for a slightly more expensive solution will have no footing in a flood of voice saying they want the cheapest and simplest thing available – even when they more knowledgeable voice knows better, and knows that in the long run the cheap bullshit solution will harm the group as a whole.

Group-mentality works great for ants. It does not work quite as great for people, because people will always have different needs and wishes. Disallowing choice simply to save some money is stupid. But that’s how the tyranny of groups work. The dumb majority will always outweigh the intelligent minority.

My co-op is no exception here, unfortunately.