Consensus [Was: Re: [ga] Posting limits for Board candidates}

["William S. Lovell" <wsl@cerebalaw.com>]

Here is an example of consensus, it would seem.  Several people suggested
adoption of this policy, Danny concurred, and after two days no other
words
have been heard.  I've seen no objections, either as to the merits
or the usual
complaint that the Chair lacks the authority to make such a change
in policy,
that no vote has been taken, etc., etc. The appropriateness of some
policies
are so self evident that none of the above, including the formal process
set
out in the Best Practices procedure, are required, and there can be
no target
of "2/3" or anything like that by which consensus could be measured,
since
no one has voted, or even said anything.  Silence is itself a
communication,
and, although on many issues the matter of whether a consensus exists
will
have to be evaluated from a full run of the Best Practices procedure,
in other
cases, like this one, we find consensus in the same way that Justice
Whizzer
White finds obscenity: "I can't define it, but I know it when I see
it."

Bill Lovell
 

DannyYounger@cs.com wrote:

Dear members,

Thank you for suggesting to remove the posting limits for our ICANN Board
candidates.

I concur; this is a reasonable action to take at this time.

Best wishes to all our candidates.

--
Any terms above that are not familiar to the reader may
possibly be explained at:
"WHAT IS": http://whatis.techtarget.com/
GLOSSARY: http://www.icann.org/general/glossary.htm
Archives of posted emails on various General Assembly
mailing lists and other ICANN information can be found at:
http://www.dnso.org/archives.html