[wg-review] [Process] Discuss - Current operating assumptions for WG-Review

[Greg Burton <sidna@feedwriter.com>]

Dear Wg members,

In order to clarify how we are going to proceed, I'd like to get feedback 
on the following assumptions. If we can formally adopt them - either as is 
or with modifications agreed to by the group - it could help focus on going 
discussions and clarify how we're getting to where ever it is we're going.

1. Consensus vs Vote
Those members of the WG who have participated in the polls have indicated a 
desire to operate on a majority vote basis. Accordingly, nothing will be 
reported out of this group as a consensus opinion unless the specific 
question has been properly formed as a question to be answered on the basis 
of consensus and consensus has been achieved on that question. The votes of 
members for or against any question or statement will be reported out for 
each statement.

A majority of the group reject the concept of their report being labeled 
"consensus" by any other body, including the NC and Board of Directors. An 
explicit statement to this effect will be included in each report produced 
by the WG. Any attempt to claim consensus in this group that does not meet 
the standards of the previous paragraph will be challenged on behalf of the 
group by the chair and co-chair.

Formal voting on questions or positions requiring group approval will take 
place in the Voting Booth, under the administration of Joop Teernstra. 
Question, positions, and motions to be submitted will be placed before the 
group for at least 48 hours of discussion of the language before being 
adopted for a vote. Because not all members can participate in short 
timeframe votes, questions for a vote will remain open for 5 days.

2. Language
The problem of translation is both perplexing and vexing. Leaving a longer 
time frame as suggested above may provide more time for translation from 
English, but this is not sufficient to truly ensure understanding. It would 
be helpful for THIS group if those fluent in other languages volunteer 
their services for translation duty.

3. Prioritizing Issues
My sense is that the following issues should be discussed in order, 
focusing on each one for a period of 4 days, to be followed by the 2 days 
of motion/statement formation. The next issue area can be discussed while 
the vote is proceeding

1. Constituencies
2. General Assembly
3. Names Council
4. Work Groups
5. Standardized Procedures
6. Outreach

I'm completely open to different priorities, if the groups' desire is to do so.


Regards,
Greg

sidna@feedwriter.com

--
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