(Fwd) FW: [wg-c] Agreement on method for consensus determinati

["Siegfried Langenbach" <svl@nrw.net>]

FYI
------- Forwarded Message Follows -------
From:           	john.c.lewis@bt.com
To:             	svl@nrw.net
Subject:        	FW: [wg-c] Agreement on method for consensus determination
Date sent:      	Wed, 14 Jul 1999 14:37:21 +0100

Seigfried,

I keep on getting my messages to wg-c@dnso.org and discuss@dnso.org
rejected.

Please could you try and forward my response to your highly valuable
comment.

Regards

John C Lewis
Manager - International Organisations Europe
BT delegate ETNO Executive Board
BT delegate EURODATA Foundation Board
Tel: +44 (0) 1442 295258 Mob: +44 (0) 802 218271
Fax: +44 (0) 1442 295861

> -----Original Message-----
> From:	Lewis,JC,John,IAR12 LEWISJC3 X 
> Sent:	14 July 1999 14:34
> To:	'wg-c@dnso.org''
> Subject:	RE: [wg-c] Agreement on method for consensus determination
> 
> The principle of consensus decisions usually relies on perspicacious
> chairmanship, relying on the abilities of the chairman to analyse and
> summarise the essential arguments of the discussion. Clearly not everyone
> who voices an opinion may add value, but they must feel that they have
> been heard, even if they don't wish to acknowledge the conclusions. This
> is where the capability of the Chairman shows in the way she/he has to
> provide positive feedback to the contributors, and also be prepared to
> challenge non-contributory behaviour. The consensus has to be tested by
> the participants, who must be prepared to concede favoured positions in
> the interests of the main objectives. 
> 
> Chairmanship is not a role according only status, but also a burden of
> work, judgement and listening, and in this environment a real challenge
> for a single individual. 
> 
> I agree that we must avoid getting sidetracked away from the issues but
> also suggest that sarcasm, sniping or spoiling tactics by the 'unheard' do
> little apart from diminish their credibility in the eyes of the rest of
> the community, whether it be at the tennis club or on the Internet.
> Perhaps the WG C code of behaviour should only allow creative or
> constructive comments, all else being automatically discounted ? 
> 
> Regards
> 
> John C Lewis
> Manager - International Organisations Europe
> BT delegate ETNO Executive Board
> BT delegate EURODATA Foundation Board
> Tel: +44 (0) 1442 295258	Mob: +44 (0) 802 218271
> Fax: +44 (0) 1442 295861
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From:	Siegfried Langenbach [SMTP:svl@nrw.net]
> Sent:	14 July 1999 08:37
> To:	'wg-c@dnso.org'
> Subject:	Re: [wg-c] Agreement on method for consensus determination
> 
> Hallo,
> 
> Even I have mixed feelings about the chair being installed by pNC, I think
> that 
> is not the real problem. Remember the chair is doing the work, not taking
> the 
> decisions : thats we.
> 
> The real problem (in my sight) is that we do not proceede.
> Somebody says something and immediately sombody else acuses him of bad
> things.
> as soon as somebody feels he has no majority in a concrete problem, he
> starts 
> to put in question the way the decision is made.
> 
> I hardly find a mail which is really dealing with what the WG should do.
> Could 
> we come back to the issue (please) ?
> 
> siegfried