RE: [ga] Consensus

["Dassa" <dassa@dhs.org>]

|> -----Original Message-----
|> From: owner-ga-full@dnso.org On Behalf Of Eric Dierker
|> Sent: Monday, June 25, 2001 11:41 AM
|> To: Steven Heath
|> Cc: ga
|> Subject: Re: [ga] Consensus
|>
|>
|> Regardless of a few outspoken anti-dotcommoners when things come to a
vote it is
|> because hardworking folks propose it out of a sense of right, and we
witness
|> statistics of consensus.  Watch closely who opposes voting and you will
see who
|> does not want verifiable statistics of consensus.  Joop is our point of
light in
|> this regard, he loves to hear what the people really think and document
it.

A vote in the GA Assembly is supposed to assist in evaluating agreement or
consensus on a position.  What I see is issues being pushed to a vote with
very little documentation or work being put into detailing the positions
relative to the issues.  Hopefully, we can all work together to define
processes where substantial work and documentation will be forthcoming from
the GA.  By processes, depending on the discussions that evolve, we may
actually refer to best practices.

I'm going to summarise a few points from a number of posts here as well, to
save on the number of posts.

I often see you post "on behalf" of the dotcommoners, I question your right
to speak on behalf of dot com holders.  I have a number myself and although
I may agree with some of your posts, I have not assigned you the right to
speak on my behalf.  A number of other domain registrants I have spoken to
also disagree with your claiming to speak on their behalf.  For anyone to
make the claim of speaking for others, they need to have that right
assigned to them.  Far as I can see, your claim is not vindicated.

In the above quoted paragraph you refer to "a few outspoken
anti-dotcommoners", personally I have not seen any behaviour in support of
such a statement against members of the GA Assembly.  Differences in
opinion, yes.  There is a difference.

Statements where attempts are made to influence how others may view the
standpoint of opposition to positions held by others have little value for
me.  In the case of the arguments I have seen against voting for instance,
they do not support the supposition the people who have made posts do not
want verifiable statistics of consensus, nor has it been defined that a
vote is a statistic of consensus as they are held in the GA.  The consensus
opinion I have personally evaluated, is a vote as a tool to be used on the
road to consensus and not the final declaration of a consensus.

I do not agree with others that we need to abandon process to achieve
consensus.  Consensus to me relies even more on process and best practice
than do vote declaring democratic forums.  For instance, too much time is
wasted on explaining points of view in various threads.  It would be a far
more profitable process if we developed a process of best practice where
those who support a particular view posted a document supporting their
viewpoint to initiate discussion and we had a process where that document
could be developed as a focus point for the consensus building.  Hopefully
work in GA-Rules will see if such best practices can be developed or not.

Darryl (Dassa) Lynch.

--
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