Re: [wg-review] Preliminary Report - Consensus

[Eric Dierker <ERIC@HI-TEK.COM>]

I believe I objected to a poll result being used because it was insecure.  I now retract that objection and all others to insecure polls as long as they are
listed as such.  It is obvious that the polling helps to center discussion and help arrive at points of mutual agreement and disagreement.  Further Mr. Burton's
apparent method of using the polls seems very sound.

I believe these comments should be under. Consensus and under Procedure.

Sotiropoulos wrote:

> 1/17/01 9:34:59 AM, Bret Busby <bret@clearsol.iinet.net.au> wrote:
>
> >If voting is compulsory (so much for the freedom of choice), then, there
> >must always be extra options on each poll; "None of the above", "I don't
> >understand the question", "I don't understand the situation", "I don't
> >understand the voting method", "I object to the voting method", "I
> >object to/disagree with the wording of the question, as it is not
> >objectively worded", etc. The inclusion of such questions, would clarify
> >the results of any poll result, and, would be all essential, if voting
> >in polls is to be made mandatory
>
> Bret, your point is valid.  Your proposal for extra options is sound, particularly the ones you list like ""None of the above", "I don't
> understand the question", "I don't understand the situation", "I don't understand the voting method", "I object to the voting method", "I
> object to/disagree with the wording of the question, as it is not objectively worded", etc."
>
> Inclusion of such questions may be the key to wider participation.
>
> However, I will maintain the position that in order to legitimately call a WG a "work group", there must be an input and output consideration built into the
> entire framework of reference.  Something `mechanical' which can be referred to for quantitative report and analysis to determine the widest possible
> scope of interest.
>
> The locution "work" may be problematic for some, but I suggest that democracy *is* work.
>
> I certainly don't flatter myself with the idea that the handful of us who take to the keyboard on this list are anywhere near any kind of adequate
> representation of the interests which could/should be expressed here.  But, we have to start somewhere.  Otherwise, these and other WGs are only
> circuses, attended by people with a lot of LEISURE time on their hands (in other words, *not* the 'bottom' we're trying to start from).
>
> 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
begin:vcard 
n:Dierker;Eric
tel;fax:(858) 571-8497
tel;work:(858) 571-8431
x-mozilla-html:FALSE
adr:;;;;;;
version:2.1
email;internet:Eric@Hi-Tek.com
end:vcard