RE: [ga] Meaning of "Consensus"

[Patrick Greenwell <patrick@stealthgeeks.net>]

On Mon, 25 Jun 2001, Gomes, Chuck wrote:

> A quorum is needed to validate a vote or a poll.  But votes and polls should
> not be thought of as methods for evaluating full consensus.  At best they
> can only be a small part of the overall consensus development process.

I'd like to echo Chuck's sentiment and add this: all of this discussion
about "consensus" being tied to a 2/3rds majority vote is an indicator
that people really aren't discussing consensus at all, but rather a
democractic voting mechanism.

As an example, if I remember my history correctly in order for a proposed
Constitutional amendment to carry in the U.S. Congress a 2/3rds majority
vote is required. Would anyone then claim that the U.S. Congress is run by
consensus?

I believe this is another indicator of poor wordsmithing which is causing
a great deal of consernation and discussions ad nauseum such as the one
we are now engaged in. The term "consensus" certainly sounds nice, but
it's not how things are being run IMO.

/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
                               Patrick Greenwell
                       Earth is a single point of failure.
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/

--
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