RE: [ga] RE: DNSO Constituency Structure

[Marc Schneiders <marc@fuchsia.bijt.net>]

Thank you. I am glad that one of the major stakeholders, if not THE major,
recognizes that all this ICANN community talk is fake.

-- 
Marc@Schneiders.ORG

On Sat, 24 Nov 2001, at 10:14 [=GMT-0500], Gomes, Chuck wrote:

> I don't disagree with any of the arguments about the failure of the
> consensus system within ICANN but I attribute that to the fact that no valid
> consensus development process has ever been put into place.  I also
> recognize that such a task would be very challenging.
>
> Chuck
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Sandy Harris [mailto:sandy@storm.ca]
> > Sent: Friday, November 23, 2001 3:55 PM
> > To: [ga]
> > Subject: Re: [ga] RE: DNSO Constituency Structure
> >
> >
> > Roeland Meyer wrote:
> > >
> > > I tend to agree with Patrick Greenwell. But, that is the
> > essence of why I
> > > have been insisting on a voting/polling system for the past
> > year. Not only
> > > that, but the "consensus" system has been much abused.
> >
> > Yes, indeed.
> >
> > > It has very poor protection against dishonest people and bad actors.
> >
> > I'm not convinced that the problems are inherent in the
> > consensus system.
> >
> > Open (and archived) discussions provide potent weapons for both sides
> > in any battle, but I'm convinced the honest ones can win.
> >
> > I think we currently have the worst of both worlds -- a system that
> > claims to be "bottom-up" and "consensus-based" but does not achieve
> > either of those goals and provides excuses for those who want
> > to prevent
> > appropriate representation of other interests.
> >
> > Also, we have various attempts to define consensus in some bogus way
> > like such-and-such a percentage in a vote, or to construct something
> > you can call consensus out of thin air.
> >
> > Besides, the system is not supposed to run entirely by consensus. The
> > Board uses votes, and that would be fine if the board were
> > appropriately
> > constituted. We don't need a polling system here anything like as much
> > as we need nine elected At Large board members actually seated.
> >
> > > That is essentially why US Congress doesn't use it, it has
> > no credibility.
> >
> > The trouble with voting and polls is that the people doing
> > the voting here
> > aren't representative. In a congress or parliament you have
> > at least an
> > attempt at that -- each member represents some specific group
> > of voters
> > and there's some attempt at fairness, whether equal
> > population in each
> > riding or a proportional representation system or two
> > senators per state
> > or ...
> >
> > If a measure achieves a majority in Congress, there's at
> > least some hope
> > that the voting bears some relation to the will of the people. If not,
> > perhaps you can throw them out next election.
> >
> > Here you cannot tell who anyone represents. Some have credible claims
> > based on elections, e.g. Karl, but those elections can certainly be
> > criticised. Other claims are far more nebulous. Does Joop speak for
> > domain name owners? Danny for dot commoners? Jeff for thousands of
> > people? Others for their companies, or industries, or parts of the
> > domain business?
> >
> > Who am I speaking for? I certainly hope it's not only for myself, that
> > I'm working toward the good of the whole community, but I
> > cannot claim
> > to represent anyone.
> >
> > Given that, it becomes not at all clear what any vote here means.
> > There is, as far as I can see, no reason to imagine that something
> > that achieves a majority in the GA has broad support among users
> > or any other relevant group.
> > --
> > 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
> >
> --
> 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
>
>

--
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