Excellent Thanks Joao > On 15 Jan 2018, at 12:59, Gert Doering <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi, > > On Mon, Jan 15, 2018 at 12:34:34PM +0100, Joao Damas wrote: >> Well, that feels like just a way of cutting a discussion short. >> One might want to read on the Dutch polder-model as an example of >> how to cooperate with recognised differences. > > APWG works on "rough consensus" and "all objections have been *addressed*" > - which does not require "the person raising the objection is convinced > and withdraws his or her objection". We try to convince :-) - but since > this does not always work, it's called "rough" consensus. > > Besides this, there is different types of objections > > - "I fully object to changing anything in this general direction, ever!" > - "I think this is good, but I disagree with the wording, because..." > - "I think this is good, and I see the need for a change, but the > proposed policy change is not the right way to do it / is too limited, > we should aim for a larger and more encompassing change" > > > Type 1 objections can not be "postponed" - if you go somewhere against > strong objection to the general direction, you need convincing, counter > arguments, and occasionally you end up at "withdraw due to no consensus" > (and sometimes the consensus is rougher than usual). > > Type 2 objections are usually dealt with by going through a few review > cycles with new text, incorporating such input into new versions of the > document. This is what we've had here: there was feedback to earlier > policy text, and Max did quite a few rounds based on that feedback, > together with RS, to come up with text that is clear to RS and to the WG. > > Type 3 objections can be handled by taking notice of them, and starting a > new policy proposal with the larger change after this one is done. > > > Jordi's is - as I explained in my summary mail without detailling these > categories - "type 3". The WG has discussed his alternative idea, and > there was not enough backing to change 2016-04 into something more general > - instead there was support to finish 2016-04 *now*, instead of leaving > those impacted by the current policy shortcomings waiting further, until > we have consensus on how a larger policy change would look like. > > Gert Doering > -- APWG chair > -- > have you enabled IPv6 on something today...? > > SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard > Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann > D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen) > Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP
