RE: [ga] Consensus

["L Gallegos" <jandl@jandl.com>]

On 25 Jun 2001, at 12:49, Steven Heath wrote:

> 
> 
> L Gallegos [mailto:jandl@jandl.com] said:
> 
> > Please point out the document defining consensus for the GA.  If a 
> > vote is not determined by a majority, what is the criteria?
> 
> con·sen·sus (kn-snss) n. 
> 
> 1, An opinion or position reached by a group as a whole: "Among political
> women... there is a clear consensus about the problems women candidates have
> traditionally faced" (Wendy Kaminer). 
> 
> 2, General agreement or accord: government by consensus. 
> 
> While it is open to debate what the exact level is 'required' it is norm
> (IMHO) that at least 2/3 support would be required for consensus.

Okay, let's say the GA agreed on 2/3 (not necessarily my choice).  
2/3 of what?  The entire voting membership?  Has that ever 
happened?  I don't think I've ever seen 2/3 participate in discussion, 
never mind a vote.  That would permanently paralyze the GA.

2/3 of the 30 or so who do participate?  This has happened 
already.  The few really loud ones squelsh those who disagree with 
them.  One could easily draw a line and the two camps would be 
obvious.  When does it reach consensus enough for a vote?

> 
> The word has not defined just as we do not define other words that are in
> the dictionary.
> 
> The proposed motion while having wide debate on the general issue of ICANN
> .biz vs non ICANN .biz reach nothing like 'wide support' to censure ICANN on
> .biz in the manner outlined.

How do we know that?

> 
> Perhaps a motion worded differently would reach greater support, such as:
> 
> That the DNSO formally issue a statement of concern against the ICANN
> board for the process in the granting of the new gTLD's (including but not
> limited to .biz) and that process of its inclusion in the USG root be
> reviewed by a taskforce.
> 

Hasn't that been done?  Is it the process or the decision?  or is it 
both?

I believe John's "motion" was a statement of more than concern. It 
is being discussed on the ga-roots list, but there is little doubt that 
anything will come of it no matter how many participants want to 
do something about the seriousness of the issue.  There will be the 
two camps and the one will prevail because it will never be allowed 
to go further - not in the GA, not by the NC.

> Now debating this and then calling for a vote might well be more productive.
> 
> 
> Steven Heath
> --
> This message was passed to you via the ga-full@dnso.org list.
> Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga-full" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
> 


--
This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html