[wg-review] Consensus - and broken questions on the polling booth

[Harald Alvestrand <Harald@Alvestrand.no>]

1) I am in favour of the creation of an individual domain name registrant's 
constituency. The polling booth insists that I have to take a position on 
whether I am in favour of them being holders or owners, something I think 
is irrelevant at this juncture.

2) The consensus questions confound my perception of consensus.
In my mind, it is possible to have rough consensus with a 2/3 majority, and 
it is possible for there to be no consensus with the same majority.

A 2/3 majority with 1/3 "I don't like it, but I can live with it" is 
probably accpetable as rough consensus. A 2/3 majority with 1/3 "my 
fundamental rights are being taken away from me, and I absolutely refuse to 
go along" is not rough consensus in my mind.

OTOH, a 95% supermajority against the same objection is probably going to 
be rough consensus.

A vote is a vote. A consensus is a value judgment.
--
Harald Tveit Alvestrand, alvestrand@cisco.com
+47 41 44 29 94
Personal email: Harald@Alvestrand.no

--
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