Re: [wg-review] The Number 1 Problem

[Greg Burton <sidna@feedwriter.com>]

At 06:46 AM 1/7/01, J J Teernstra wrote:
>At 17:13 7/01/01 -0700, Greg wrote:
>
> >Karl, if you still believe that after you read the following, I'll print it
> >out and eat it.
> >
>Bon Appetit, Greg.

I'm prepared to eat it. Literally.

>But you forgot to mention that real consensus is only possible within a
>group of aligned interests.

No, Joop, it isn't. The only alignment that is required is that they are 
willing to come to agreement under some circumstance or other, on a policy 
statement or action statement. I've seen consensus occur among people who 
hadn't spoken to each other in 4 years, and who continued to regard each 
other as enemies after the process. They all wanted some movement and 
results.....but to describe them as aligned would be wrong.

One pair I did leave out, though, was:

Real consensus shares responsibility. So-called "consensus" assigns blame.

>The lack of real consensus has been the result of the refusal of "the ruled"
>to give their consent to being ruled by other interests' consensus.

Perhaps, among other things :)

>They want their own representatives to have a vote.
>At this moment , in this WG, with regards to DNSO reform, this can happen.

The broken code process is broken code. There are many reasons why 
consensus can't happen on most things brought here. We can achieve quite a 
bit, if we care to - but for the most part we won't get there by consensus.

Regards,
Greg



--
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