Re: [wg-review] Confusion between majority vote and consensus

[Jefsey Morfin <jefsey@hotpop.com>]

Kent,
IMHO I think that when you have done in you brain the separation between:

  - SO: consulting groups documenting the advisable, on consensus they 
presented all the alternatives and disaggreements
-  @large representatives of the user demands, working out priorities 
through voted consensus
-  BoD deciding the possible as an equilbrium between those two, protected 
from the large Groups by the GAC Govs.
-  NICs direct local and cultural ICANN interfaces with @large, etxernal 
interests and Govs legitimizing the ICANN through their LIC
you will be a very brillant working fellow partner.

I do enjoy reading you and I am sorry to have to oppose you.

Jefsey

On 19:55 06/01/01, Kent Crispin said:
>On Sat, Jan 06, 2001 at 12:22:09AM -0800, Chris McElroy wrote:
> > > That is, while policies are to be developed by consensus processes, some
> > > of the internal processes of the NC are more rigidly constrained.  No
> > > big deal.  There is a complex history as to why this particular
> > > formulation was chosen, and why the NC was constrained to this schem by
> > > the bylaws, but the details would probably bore folks.  They do not
> > > really relate to the development of policies, and had to do with a
> > > battle during the DNSO formation between the "strong NC" school and the
> > > "weak NC" school.
> >
> > By all means, Kent, bore us. How can the how the internal processes of the
> > NC not be related to the development of policies?
>
>The "strong NC" position was that the NC should be elected, and once
>elected they would essentially do all the work of the DNSO -- policies
>would be actually developed in the NC.  It was felt by this camp that
>large groups communicating over email lists would never get anything
>done (certainly there is lots of evidence of that), and that the only
>way that the DNSO could ever hope to actually get any work done was
>through a strong executive committee (aka the NC).
>
>The other camp favored a direct democracy, and at least some of them
>explicitly favored inefficiency -- they felt that it was better if the
>DNSO didn't actually formulate many policies, essentially operating on
>"the best government is the least government" model.
>
>The end result, as usual, was a somewhat vague compromise.  The NC was
>left with the role of "managing the consensus gathering process", which,
>by the normal meaning of the words, means that the consensus gathering
>process is something outside the NC: for example, when we say that a
>manager *manages* a bunch of employees that manager doesn't normally do
>the *work* of the employees.
>
>But in unusual circumstances, a manager may indeed do the work of an
>employee under their management.  That is, the terminology is vague
>enough to give the NC the power to produce documents on their own,
>should the necessity arise.  However, in normal understanding of the
>language used, the clear meaning is that the NC not normally do the work
>of policy development.
>
>I use phrases like "normal understanding of the language used" because
>there have been some seriously contorted interpretations of the language
>in the bylaws.
>
> > Isn't that like saying the
> > way I was driving had nothing at all to do with the wreck?
>
>No.  I view the internal processes of the NC more like the mechanism of
>the car, not the driver.  The procedures concerned with consensus gathering
>are working group procedures, not NC procedures.
>
>--
>Kent Crispin                               "Be good, and you will be
>kent@songbird.com                           lonesome." -- Mark Twain
>--
>This message was passed to you via the wg-review@dnso.org list.
>Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
>("unsubscribe wg-review" in the body of the message).
>Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html


--
This message was passed to you via the wg-review@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe wg-review" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html