Re: [wg-review] The Number 2 Problem (solution)

[DPF <david@farrar.com>]

On Mon, 08 Jan 2001 17:48:53 -0700, Greg Burton wrote:

>Nice post, Chris - thanks.
>
>At 04:51 PM 1/8/01, Chris McElroy wrote:
>>Then in that case we will have to have a definition for each.
>
>My definitions would be:
>
>Consensus = "unanimous or no blocking opinions after a specific request for 
>any blocking opinions has bee requested"
>Near-consensus="90% or greater in agreement"
>Super-Majority="67% in agreement"
>         NOTE - the reason for this change (from "strong" majority") is 
>that the White Paper uses this term. 67% is a normal             break 
>point, so I'd be comfortable with it, or 60%, or anything in between.
>Majority="greater than 50% in agreement"

I would second/support these definitions being recommended.  It would
allow the BoD and NC to judge across all working groups etc the level
of support for recommendations.

We could start by using such definitions in our own WG report.

DPF
________________________________________________________________________
<david at farrar dot com>
NZ Usenet FAQs - http://www.dpf.ac.nz/usenet/nz
ICQ 29964527
--
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