ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

Voting vs. reasoned debate vs. "rough consensus"

2005-04-07 07:54:03
Re: Voting Idea? (Was: Last Call: 'Requirements for 
IETF        DraftSubmission Toolset' to Informational RFC)
 Date: 2005-04-06 09:12
 From: Brian E Carpenter <brc(_at_)zurich(_dot_)ibm(_dot_)com>

The free site I found says "voting"; of course, what the IETF
can use such things for is only straw polls. But in a case
like the present one, I think that is a reasonable way of
finding out what the centre of gravity of opinion is.

In ASCII art:
                   /\
Consensus:   ____/  \___

                       /\
Rough Consensus  ____/  \___/\___


Badly phrased question: ___/\____/\____/\____/\___

(I'm reasonably serious about that)

Maybe -- maybe not.

Here's what one IETF WG chair had to say (where "this topic" refers
to a specific issue under discussion in the WG):
----------------------
On the topic of voting: Especially on this topic, I think voting 
would be stupid. The decision is about rough consensus. One screaming 
person does not indicate that there is no rough consensus, but one or 
two well-reasoned arguments against a screaming huge crowd does. And 
a huge number of "I'd prefer X, but I couldn't care less" votes 
versus 2 or 3 well-argued "X will spell doom for the Internet, and Y 
will save it" votes *is* rough consensus for Y over X. So voting 
generally doesn't help me decide one way or the other that there is 
rough consensus.
-----------------------

In short, quality of argument trumps (if the chair is chairing)
quantity.  Voting (incl. as "straw polls") only measures quantity, not
quality.

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>