RE: [wg-review] [CONSENSUS] IS A LOADED TERM...

["Eric" <eric@springbreaktravel.com>]

I don't think that would be prudent.  I would propose that we allow the
report to be submitted but add an outline describing how we arrived at the
conclusions we did.  The results form the polls / voting can be included so
that the board can see exactly how many people were in favor of what.  It
will also give them a clear example of why it is important to provide future
wg's with an exact definition.  Didn't we already decide how this WG defined
consensus?  Perhaps you could include a "minority opinion" if you disagree.
That does not seem out of order.

-----Original Message-----
From: Sotiropoulos [mailto:sotiris@hermesnetwork.com]
Sent: Monday, January 15, 2001 5:39 PM
To: eric@springbreaktravel.com; 'Eric Dierker';
eric@springbreaktravel.com
Cc: 'Greg Burton'; wg-review@dnso.org
Subject: RE: [wg-review] [CONSENSUS] IS A LOADED TERM...


1/15/01 5:39:43 PM, "Eric" <eric@springbreaktravel.com> wrote:

>It is my understanding that Sotiropoulos is making a motion that we include
>a addendum that explains the problems that we have had agreeing on what a
>consensus is.  It seems to me that would be important for DNSO to
understand
>what problems need to be overcome and what terms need to be more clearly
>defined in order to make things operate more efficiently.  Was I incorrect
>in my understanding?

No.  I am saying we hold up the report until we ascertain just what exactly
the majority in this WG consider a consensus to be.

Sotiris Sotiropoulos
          Hermes Network, Inc.





--
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