Re: [ga] Consensus on consensus?

["William S. Lovell" <wsl@cerebalaw.com>]

"Gomes, Chuck" wrote:

> Before discarding "consensus," it seems like it would
> be a good idea to
> first give "consensus" a legitimate chance.  I still contend that
> that has
> never happened.  It would require a substantial investment in
> first of all
> establishing documented and objective processes and procedures that
> would
> guide the consensus development process.
Another excellent definition of the Best Practices process.  See
http://www.cerebalaw.com/BPIial.htm.

Due to be initiated in mid-April with a Call For Action, as soon as we
can get the web page set up.  The related discussion will take place in
the icannatlarge.com Forum, under the bottom topic Best Practices . . . "

Your comments below concerning the nature of consensus, when it
is achieved and when it is not, are well taken. Certain areas of the
globe aside, civilization does exist on this globe, and it need only be
honored in the consensus-seeking process. Everything major can
be handled, or if not, our claim to have developed a civilized global
community will have to be reconsidered.

Bill Lovell

 That has never happened although
there have been a few brief starts.

As I have said before, it is okay if consensus cannot be reached on
particular issues.  It should not be at all surprising that, in the diverse
global Internet community, one size more often than not does not fit all.
That is perfectly okay.  That allows for diversity in the marketplace and
gives consumers choices.  It's a shame that there is so much fear of a free
market and instead a desire for centralized regulation.

Chuck

-----Original Message-----
From: DannyYounger@cs.com [mailto:DannyYounger@cs.com]
Sent: Tuesday, March 26, 2002 8:05 PM
To: ga@dnso.org
Cc: DJohnson@Wilmer.COM
Subject: [ga] Consensus on consensus?

Karl Auerbach in his "Prescription-to-Promote" has argued that:  "The
concept
of "consensus" must be discarded", with all decisions to be based on counted

voting using clearly defined procedures such as Robert's Rules.   Stuart
Lynn
has likewise argued that a private sector body, based on consensus and
consent, has been shown to be impractical.

This begs the question... is it time to replace the consensus process?  If
so, how do we avoid establishing a structural model that relegates certain
groups automatically to minority status?   ICANN seems to be enamoured with
voting blocks... Can we move to a one-man/one-vote mechanism, and will such
a
move be accompanied with full membership rights for all participants?

ICANN doesn't have the greatest track record with respect to honoring
consensus... can we expect it to honor an actual vote of the complete
membership?  More questions than answers at this point...

for Karl's treatise, see:
http://www.cavebear.com/rw/prescription-to-promote.pdf

--
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