Re: First call for vote on immediate vote under section 4.2.2

2006-10-31 Thread MJ Ray
Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > If that impression is accurate, it means the DPL is not making > > "decisions which are consistent with the consensus of the opinions of > > the Developers" as he was elected to do. That is to say: this trouble > > is

Re: First call for vote on immediate vote under section 4.2.2

2006-10-31 Thread Russ Allbery
MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Consensus as used in these sorts of discussions and documents is not >> synonymous with unanimity. It is consensus in the vein of M-W's 1(b) >> definition: "the judgment arrived at by most of those concerned > consens

Re: First call for vote on immediate vote under section 4.2.2

2006-10-31 Thread martin f krafft
also sprach Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.10.31.0533 +0100]: > Uh, 80/20 would generally be a consensus. Ah, if this is the misunderstanding: the infamous 80/20 rule (Pareto's principle) in this case meant: 20% of the participants of the discusionss make 80% of the noise. http://en.wikip

Re: First call for vote on immediate vote under section 4.2.2

2006-10-31 Thread martin f krafft
also sprach MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.10.30.1107 +0100]: > If that impression is accurate, it means the DPL is not making > "decisions which are consistent with the consensus of the opinions > of the Developers" as he was elected to do. That is to say: this > trouble is partly the DPL's fau

Re: First call for vote on immediate vote under section 4.2.2

2006-10-31 Thread MJ Ray
martin f krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > also sprach MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.10.30.1107 +0100]: > > If that impression is accurate, it means the DPL is not making > > "decisions which are consistent with the consensus of the opinions > > of the Developers" as he was elected to do. That is to

Re: First call for vote on immediate vote under section 4.2.2

2006-10-31 Thread MJ Ray
Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > We need consensus in the vein of M-W's 1(a) definition "general > > agreement : UNANIMITY" and 2 definition "group solidarity in sentiment > > and belief" to get the biggest

Re: First call for vote on immediate vote under section 4.2.2

2006-10-31 Thread Kalle Kivimaa
MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > outweigh a screaming crowd in the IETF process. We have seen reasoned > objections to several DPL decisions, yet the screaming crowd is used to > drown out calls for consensus. This DPL hasn't even looked for rough > consensus on some issues, as far as I've se

Re: First call for vote on immediate vote under section 4.2.2

2006-10-31 Thread Russ Allbery
MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> That's certainly someting to strive for, but I don't think it's a >> practical *requirement* in an organization the size of Debian. I do >> agree that we shouldn't easily give up on trying to reach that form of >> str