> On Nov 11, 2023, at 7:24 PM, Steven M Jones <s...@crash.com> wrote: > > On 11/12/23 03:59, Neil Anuskiewicz wrote: >> What is the definition of rough consensus. That is if you took a vote, 100 >> people voted yes and 3 voted no, the three win? Id there’s a document that >> states these rules I’d be happy to dig into it. If there’s a rule we should >> have a vote. Who is entitled to vote? Like I’m new to this and so it’d be >> understandable if I’m not entitled to a vote. That said, what do the rules >> say? > > > Scott gave the chapter-and-verse reference: > >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc7282 > > The problem we typically have is with the level of participation. > Specifically, not having enough people actively participating. (I am guilty > of being a "variable" participant myself.) > > As I described the situation to a group last week, consensus is a very > different animal when you have your 100 participants, versus 6 or 8 regular > participants. The lower the number, the more space each question/objection > takes up. > > That's just group dynamics; on top of that, you have questions like whether > the X or Y participants you have adequately represent the "Internet > community," or even the "IETF community," as Murray raised in San Francisco.
I volunteer to participate when I’m ready in terms of knowledge and I’ll strive to develop my participation savvy. Lol. _______________________________________________ dmarc mailing list dmarc@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
