[soac-newgtldapsup-wg] On the subject of consensus

[Avri Doria <avri@xxxxxxx>]

Dear Group members,

In listening to the tape this weekend, I picked up a feeling that there may be 
discontent in some members with the way we have proposed calling consensus 
instead of voting.  I believe it was called guessing and I believe indicated 
that it made them unhappy.  If I have erred in my perceptions please forgive 
me.  

I figured that in any case, as we come down to the consensus calling part of 
the process, I would take this chance to remind people of what is in the 
guidelines associated with our charter.  

You will find those at: 
http://gnso.icann.org/en/improvements/proposed-working-group-guidelines-05feb09-en.pdf

The specific section follows:

---

3.6. Standard Methodology for Making Decisions

The Chair will be responsible for designating each position as having one of 
the following designations: 

Unanimous consensus 
Rough consensus - a position where a small minority disagrees but most agree 
Strong support but significant opposition 
No consensus

In the case of rough consensus, strong support or no consensus, the WG Chair is 
encouraged to facilitate that minority viewpoint(s) are stated and recorded.

If several participants in a WG disagree with the designation given to a 
position by the Chair or any other rough consensus call, they can follow these 
steps sequentially:

1. Send email to the Chair, copying the WG explaining why the decision is 
believed to be in error.

2. If the Chair still disagrees, forward the appeal to the CO liaison(s). The 
Chair must explain his or her reasoning in the response. If the liaison(s) 
supports the Chair's position, forward the If the liaison(s) supports the 
Chair's position, forward the appeal to the CO. The liaison(s) must explain his 
or her reasoning in the response If the CO liaison disagrees with the Chair, 
forward the appeal to the CO. The liaison(s) and chair must both explain their 
reasoning in the response.

3. If the CO supports the Chair and liaison's position, attach a statement of 
the appeal to the Board report. If the CO does not support the Chair and 
liaison’s position, the CO should recommend remedial action to the Chair. This 
statement should include all of the documentation from all steps in the appeals 
process and should include a statement from the CO. 

4 Based upon the WG's needs and/or the Chair’s direction, WG participants may 
request that their names be associated explicitly with each view/position 
(optional). 

If a chartering organization wishes to deviate from the standard methodology 
for making decisions or empower the WG to decide its own decision-making 
methodology it should be affirmatively stated in the WG Charter.

Consensus calls should always involve the entire Working Group. It is the role 
of the Chair to designate which level of consensus is reached and announce this 
designation to the Working Group. Member(s) of the Working Group should be able 
to challenge the designation of the Chair as part of the Working Group 
discussion. However, if disagreement persists, members of the WG may use the 
above noted process to challenge the designation.

----

You will notice that the document does not mention voting or polling at all.

It neither permits it nor prohibits it.  Polling is a tool used by some WG 
chairs, and I do not think it is illegitimate.  

As I said it is a method I prefer not to apply, but would have acceded to my 
co-chair's desire to use it had he believed that we should.

I also stated that in my opinion and experience it is not a conclusive method 
and often leads not only to hardening of positions, but also to disagreements 
about what was voted on.  Unless the questions a professionally framed and 
tested to be sure that they contain no ambiguity, each poll I have been part of 
lately has resulted in at least some, if not many debates after the poll on 
what it really mean.

So, Evan and I talk, we agree among ourselves on the degree of consensus we 
might have and then we present that initial conclusion (I guess this is the 
'guess') to you all and from the feed back we decide whether we are there of 
whether we need to adjust.  It is a tried and true process, and while sometimes 
it is not a quick process, in my experience it works.

thanks

a.