Re: [ICANN-EU] Installing the New Charter.

[Jefsey Morfin <jefsey@wanadoo.fr>]

Jeff asks for a formal definition of consensus.

As this question has been discussed, could we formalize it this way:

-  consensus is when there is no objection. Ex. BC/DNSO broadcasts
    a document calling for comments withing 10 days otherwise the
    document is adopted.

-  rough consensus is when there are objections, but no veto. When
    there is a rough consensus it is possible to keep working toward a
    consensus.

The problem is to decide about what is a veto, ie the seriousness
of an objection. I would propose a Jury to be attached to the ML:
their role would be to accept the seriousness of an objection not
to judge it. Only one acknowledgement by one from the Jury would
be enough. The Jury is part of the quality/interest of the ML and the
Members  should be chosen by the owner, the owner could be part
of them.

Jefsey


At 07:23 10/10/00, you wrote:
>Thomas and all,
>
>   For the purposes of this mailing list charter for the EU, what is the
>definition of "Rough Consensus"?  How or is it measured?  What
>method is used to determine "Rough Consensus"?
>
>Thomas Roessler wrote:
>
> > I'd suggest that we should install the new charter as soon as
> > possible.  The last draft is available from this address:
> >
> > 
> ftp://fitug.fitug.de/pub/icann-drafts/draft-roessler-icann-europe-charter-20000911.txt
> >
> > If you have any objections, please raise them now.
> >
> > --
> > Thomas Roessler                         <roessler@does-not-exist.org>
>
>Regards,
>
>--
>Jeffrey A. Williams
>Spokesman INEGroup (Over 112k members strong!)
>CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
>Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
>E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com
>Contact Number:  972-447-1800 x1894 or 9236 fwd's to home ph#
>Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208