Re: [wg-d] Robert's Rules

[Karl Auerbach <karl@CaveBear.com>]

> Recall that Karl said that those who favored "rough consensus" were
> "fuzzy" thinkers, enamored of "new-age" ideas.

I said that "rough consensus" leads to fuzzy results.

And I stand by my statement that it one of those "new age" ideas formed of
equal parts "peace", "love", and "good vibes".  And as such is a pretty
rotten formulation when one is addressing difficult questions.

> In general, it's important to realize that there is a *great* deal of
> "legislative history" in these debates.

Please produce it.  You are famous for saying such things and then not
being able to demonstrate it.

Besides, had there been discussion, it would be merely a suggested
roadmap, not obligatory.

Clearly, for example, the IFWP process substantially debated much of this
as well, and we ended up with ICANN instead.

> Some people seem to think we can simply ignore that legislative
> history,

And some fabricate it.

	--karl--