<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
Re: [ga] RE: Consensus development process
On 02:26 26/11/01, Eric Dierker said:
>"legitimacy in terms of representation of all stakeholders" Needs to be
>changed
>to all interested stakeholders.
Dear Eric,
here is the difference between consensus and democractic process. In
democracy you make sure that every people is represented. In consensus (as
per the new social model or "me/we" model) you try to make sur that every
piece of concern for every people is represented. Like in a Courts, when
thousands of people may sue one corporation: each of the party is
represented by a small lawyers team.
What counts is not the number but the quality (competence, scope) of the
"champions". This is also why 2/3 is only a rough rule taking into account
that many people may vote against their own position if they see that the
resolution is not a real consensus and will create more problems than it
will solve. 2/3 are no consensus, but it can be accepted as a good test if
voters are responsible people and if all the process outlined by Danny is
followed.
This is certainly appropriate to the ICANN ICP production and to a serene
management as per the MoU. It is not for the mission creep.
Jefsey
--
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
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|