Re: [ga] Formulating Consensus ??

[Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com>]

Eric and all assembly members,

Eric Dierker wrote:

> Thank you Patrick,
>
> Here is a quote from that URL;
> "Additionally, the values and principles which form the basis of commitment
>  to work together to resolve conflict need to be clearly defined, and accepted
> by all involved."
>
> And here is a quote from our creation;
> "The GA shall be an open forum for participation in the work of the DNSO,
>     and open to all who are willing to contribute effort to the work of the
>     DNSO."
>
> And so I ask;
>
> What are the values and principles which form the basis of commitment here?
> Certainly they are not clearly defined not accepted by all involved.

  Good question and a good answer, however over generalized.

>
>
> I just worked through some issues with a member, when I actually agreed with him
>
> and directly quoted him for a proposal he negatively asserted that I was "flip
> flopping".
> Now clearly we had different values and principles.

  Yes but this is between only two GA assembly members.  Hence
such cannot be construed as one is wrong and one is right.  Rather
as such may apply to the GA members a motion or motions would
nee to be crafted or proposed, as has been done on several instances
before and than voted upon in order to determine that the GA
members have a consensus on such motion(s).  This is tedious work,
but essential if the GA is to have a set of principals that the members
have a consensus on and to build upon as well.

>
>
> Here is another partial quote;
> "and participation in research and drafting committees and working groups."
>
> I think we should have a standing drafting committee to put proposals together
> for consensus.
> I would call it a GA council.

  SUch a council would seem inappropriate for an "Assembly" as
the GA (General assembly) is in and of itself, such a council.  Therefore
as an assembly the GA members can put together these WG's as has
also been done before via a motion(s) for their formation and than
further work.  Than any recommendations of the participating WG
participants, to be open to all whom wish to participate, can be
decided upon by the VOTE of the GA members.  Hence than we
have a bonified consensus or the DNSO GA to pass on to the
NC as well as the ICANN BoD and staff.


>
>
> Sincerely,
> Eric
>
> Patrick Corliss wrote:
>
> > On Mon, 26 Nov 2001 23:13:16 -0800, Eric Dierker wrote:
> >
> > " . . . damned if I know how to get some consensus going on this issue."
> >
> > On Tue, 27 Nov 2001 13:08:34 +0100, Jefsey Morfin wrote:
> >
> > " . . . a consensus is not a vote but a no major objection by qualified
> > interests that (if the ICANN processus recently underlined by Danny is
> > respected) a 2/3 vote of a balanced open group may warranty."
> >
> > Hi Eric & Jefsey
> >
> > I have found, on the net, On Conflict and Consensus -- A Handbook on Formal
> > Consensus Decision Making.  The URL for the Table of Contents is as follows:
> >
> > http://www.consensus.net/ocaccontents.html
> >
> > This looks very promising as a way to formulate consensus.
> >
> > Best regards
> > Patrick Corliss
>
> --
> This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
> Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

Regards,
--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 121k members/stakeholdes strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com
Contact Number:  972-244-3801 or 214-244-4827
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208


--
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