Re: [ga] GA position on Verisign contract

[Sandy Harris <sandy@storm.ca>]

"William X. Walsh" wrote:

> > Thanks, William. But, actually, not very many people voted, did they? ...
> 
> No, the failure to vote means that they have consented to not being
> taken into account, ...

Nonsense.

> It's a tactic agreement with whatever the result is, since by not
> participating they have voluntarily given up their right to object to
> it being the consensus.

Not voting gives up the right to vote on that issue, nothing more.
 
> One cannot claim that because people were silent that the consensus is
> invalid.

No, but conversely there is no reason to imagine that a vote indicates
a valid consensus, short of a unanimous vote of all players.
 
> If they were silent, they were silent by their own choice. Either they
> didn't want their opinion taken into account, they had no opinion, or
> they saw that there was already sufficient support for their position
> and saw no reason to enter the fray.

Some of us feel that expressing an opinion on the list, and arguing for
it, is the interesting part. If a consensus is going to emerge, it will
emerge here.

Votes can be a useful exercise, measuring the weight of opinion. They
might confirm a consensus, or help clarify issues en route to one.
--
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