Re: [ga] primary objectives of the General Assembly mailing list

[Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Danny, Debbie and all,

  I agree with Dannys brief historic review as rational for being
very concerned regarding any form of consensus which cannot
or has not been measured.  In fact, and as a matter of documented
historic DNSO and GNSO as well as IETF and IAB decision
making, "Rough Consensus" practice has lead to many of the
gross mistakes which are causing most of the DNS, Domain
Name, and ASO problems we and all users are facing and
dealing with now.

  I strongly disagree that voting on proposals and significant
process related functions will bog anything down if members are
diligent and a staff for drafting, ect., is in place.  Of course a
staff cost $$ which no one on this forum has, or is willing to
part with or generate, other than myself as far as I know today.

Danny Younger wrote:

> Joop has put forward a very reasonable concern.
>
> The power of the Chair to determine rough consensus
> can easily be abused (as is the case at the moment
> within the GNSO's WHOIS WG where the BC Chair Philip
> Shepard is declaring "agreement" on language where no
> such agreement exists -- and we've seen this happen
> before when BC members have chaired other working
> groups such as the earlier DNSO Review WG).
>
> With that said, I think we're making a mistake by
> becoming infatuated with the notion of attaining and
> representing a consensus view.  If this body will ever
> get to the point of issuing documents to the Board, it
> will be more important to record and transmit all
> views and the rationale for such views (as this body
> is, by definition, not a constituency that has the
> obligation to endeavor to represent a rough
> consensus).
>
> As such, I would change the wording to read "to
> ascertain and transmit the views of the membership".
>
> Please note that as some list participants are
> articulating the views of special-interest communities
> (this is a cross-constituency platform), the output of
> this body cannot necessarily be viewed as the "views
> of the ordinary citizen".
>
> Joop wrote:
>
> Frankly, I'm a bit worried about any mechanism that
> purports "to ascertain and represent the consensual
> views of the ordinary citizen as a collective" if it
> isn't based on voting and counting.
>
>
>

Regards,

--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 134k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
   Abraham Lincoln

"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is
very often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B;
liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
===============================================================
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security
IDNS. div. of Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402
E-Mail jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
 Registered Email addr with the USPS
Contact Number: 214-244-4827