Re: [wg-c] Re: [wg-c-1] First question

["Mark C. Langston" <skritch@home.com>]

On 12 July 1999, Kent Crispin <kent@songbird.com> wrote:

>I think that, with a couple of exceptions, there is fairly strong
>consensus among those present on this list that new gTLDs are
>desirable.  

Kent, I politely and respectfully request that you, and anyone else
with the urge to do so (e.g., members of the pDNC) refrain from making
statements about consensus existing for an issue until there is some
tangible evidence to support such a claim.  This would go a long
way towards establishing legitimacy, both personal and organizational.


>We can simply note that the exceptions exist, and why, 
>and leave it at that.  I suggest that in cases where a strong 
>difference of opinion that those with the different opinions be 
>charged with writing a "minority report" which can either be 
>incorporated in the body of the WG report, or attached as an 
>appendix. 

This sounds like a decent mechanism, but which opinion gets to
be the minority?  We've yet to establish any method for determining
consensus.  We don't even have a current, pulically available, and
accurate count of the people subscribed to this list.  This would be
the very first step in deciding where consensus lay, if any, and 
finding the minority opinion, if one exists.  

It also assumes that only one minority opinion will exist.  This
might not be a valid assumption.

-- 
Mark C. Langston	     			Let your voice be heard:
mark@bitshift.org				     http://www.idno.org
Systems Admin					    http://www.icann.org
San Jose, CA					     http://www.dnso.org