On 02/11/2007, James Carlson <james.d.carlson at sun.com> wrote: > Shawn Walker writes: > > On 02/11/2007, Keith M Wesolowski <keith.wesolowski at sun.com> wrote: > > > The right thing to do is roll back the content to the state it was in > > > for most of the past 2 years. I had hoped that reaching consensus > > > here about the underlying issue would make that clear, but for reasons > > > > Claiming consensus when there is none is a bit disingenuous. > > > > Please provide your interesting definition of consensus. > > The public email record of ogb-discuss clearly shows consensus around > Keith's proposed notice to Sun. We'll be taking this up at our next > meeting to make it formal.
Again, you fail to define consensus. If you believe it to be the majority opinion, how are you determining that? Counting emails? If so, I respectfully suggest you have erred gravely. If you want to claim consensus; call a vote. To do otherwise is misrepresenting this community and makes me regret voting for the OGB members. -- Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ "We don't have enough parallel universes to allow all uses of all junction types--in the absence of quantum computing the combinatorics are not in our favor..." --Larry Wall
