Re: [gnso-vi-feb10] Short-term schedule
- To: Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: [gnso-vi-feb10] Short-term schedule
- From: Avri Doria <avri@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2010 18:45:58 +0200
On 29 Jun 2010, at 18:11, Drazek, Keith wrote:
> 2. How can we determine in the next 3 weeks whether we have consensus
> with a majority/small minority, or no consensus on a single proposal?
the only process i know is that after a point the chairs test the waters by
deciding whether we have reached consensus or strong support and measure how
loud the scream are. from there they recalibrate and try again.
the other part of this whole process, is that it is important for those who
have the opinions (majority or minority) to be sure that their positions have
really been heard, understood and considered. for a big majority to say, we
are the big majority hence we win without ever seriously considering all of the
minority positions fails the process in my view.
i still see us with split support of two primary positions with a bunch of
minority opinions that are pretty much languishing on the edges because those
who have accepted the bigger positions just don't want to hear from them
anymore. can't blame them, but it is not my understanding of how the process
succeeds. Minorities will often accept a majority position when they are sure
they have been heard, understood and considered. Otherwise they just feel
(of course some minorities never accept and some majorities never listen and
that life for you.)