On 2/10/09 7:20 AM, "Andrew Sullivan" <ajs(_at_)shinkuro(_dot_)com> wrote:
I'm not sure I agree with that claim. It's true that decisions are
not made by counting votes. Decisions _are_ supposed to be made,
during consensus call, by weighing the arguments and the apparent
support for the document.
Under classical consensus decision-making there's
a prerequisite that the participants have some
investment in the process itself and that they
actively participate. Drive by "I'm against it!"
posts almost certainly don't qualify as
participation - there's absolutely no opportunity
there for negotiation and compromise.
I don't think I'm splitting hairs, here, or being
process-y beyond what the situation requires.
Consensus process can produce very good results when
it's done well and it can produce crap and deadlock
when it's not. My own opinion is that the IETF does
consensus very, very badly indeed, in large part
because there's some confusion about what it actually
is. And frankly, weighing the "apparent support for
the document" by virtue of the drive-bys is a lot more
like voting than not.
Ietf mailing list