Re: [ga] RE: Consensus development process

[Jefsey Morfin <jefsey@wanadoo.fr>]

On 02:26 26/11/01, Eric Dierker said:
>"legitimacy in terms of representation of all stakeholders"  Needs to be 
>changed
>to all interested stakeholders.

Dear Eric,
here is the difference between consensus and democractic process. In 
democracy you make sure that every people is represented. In consensus (as 
per the new social model or "me/we" model) you try to make sur that every 
piece of concern for every people is represented. Like in a Courts, when 
thousands of people may sue one corporation: each of the party is 
represented by a small lawyers team.

What counts is not the number but the quality (competence, scope) of the 
"champions". This is also why 2/3 is only a rough rule taking into account 
that many people may vote against their own position if they see that the 
resolution is not a real consensus and will create more problems than it 
will solve. 2/3 are no consensus, but it can be accepted as a good test if 
voters are responsible people and if all the process outlined by Danny is 
followed.

This is certainly appropriate to the ICANN ICP production and to a serene 
management as per the MoU. It is not for the mission creep.
Jefsey






  

--
This message was passed to you via the ga-full@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga-full" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html