Re: Consensus vs Voting (RE: [ga] DNSO General Assembly call to change seating rule)

["YJ Park" <yjpark@myepark.com>]

Since Chuck has mentioned here some references to Names Council
which may mislead general assembly or others, I as one of NC members,
want to share my experiences in NC for almost one and a half years.

> Now to your point about whether you should have called for the vote.  I
> think that was fine.  As I stated earlier, I just don't believe that the
> results of the vote should be interpreted to be a GA rough consensus
> position.  On the other hand, to report that the active participants on
the
> GA list during a specified period of time reached a rough consensus on the
> the two points.  Communicating that to the NC would be appropriate.

It woud be a more interesting argument here if you have a chance to see
how NC comes up with so-called NC's position or consensus.

Every entity witin the DNSO needs its desperate efforts and eagerness
to improve themselves. The danger of NC and Board can be it's not
watched properly with adequate checks and balances.

> If I was an NC member or a board member, when I was presented with a
> recommendation that is claimed to be a consensus position, I would expect
to
> see some measurable data to back that up.

Measurable consensus in NC can be very difficult to fathom.

1. To assist the Board in the task of ....., the Names Council recommends
    that the ICANN staff do .......

2. Surprise Consensus which has not been properly mentioned even in the
    NC agenda item and announced as NC position later.

> Otherwise, I would not be convinced that consensus was truly reached.
> My personal opinion is that no DNSO group has done a very good job
> in this regard so far.  And I think that in the next year it will be
critical to
> work on this, that is, to establish clearly defined consensus building
criteria.

Who is going to paly a check and balance role for NC?

YJ

--
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