[wg-d] Consensus

[david@aminal.com]

Here we go again with the political culture clash.

Lobbyists don't do consensus, in any of its forms.

Any lobbyist who gives up a position for the 
'good of the whole group' will soon be out of a job.

Thus, rough consensus. Which means that if the group
knows that minority members hold positions that are
uncompromising, those positions can be
discounted. 

Thus, control of the composition of the group becomes
critical, and you get gerrymandering.

True consensus can only occur when a participants
loyalty is to the group *as a whole*, not to a
constituency. The participant *must* be willing to
sacrifice a self interested position to make consensus
work.

I doubt very much whether anything even remotely 
approaching a true consensus process will occur in
ICANN.

A better description of ICANN is self regulation
implemented by traditional industry lobbying 
organizations.

If you don't have an established role in that power
structure, you don't get to play. Perhaps the
involvement of orgs like CPT and CDT can help to
mitigate the damage, but I'm not that optimistic.

If any good has come out of working group c, it is
the absolutely clear illustration of the above.

David Schutt