Re: [Discussioni] OSD && DFSG convergence
On Wed, 2003-01-29 at 11:59, Steve Greenland wrote:
> On 29-Jan-03, 00:47 (CST), Russell Nelson <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> > John Goerzen writes:
> > Besides which, you are but one person. You do not get to say what the
> > consensus is on the RPSL. Given that I, one member of debian-legal,
> > say one thing, and you, one member of debian-legal, say another thing,
> > it seems that 1) we don't have a consensus,
> "I don't think that word means what you think it means". "Consensus" is
> not universal agreement. A single dissenter does not break consensus.
Actually, IIRC, Russell Nelson is a Quaker -- a member of the Religious
Society of Friends. In Quaker circles, consensus means unanimous
agreement -- a single dissent does "block" consensus. Thus, it's
considered very important to only block concensus when your conscience
demands it -- not frivilously. At least, this is what I learned at a
Quaker school in Philadelphia -- but IANAQ.
I think this definition is actually useful. But whether it should be
adopted depends on whether members of the list understand how to live in
a consensus-based society -- when to block concensus, and when not to.
-Dave Turner Stalk Me: 617 441 0668
"On matters of style, swim with the current, on matters
of principle, stand like a rock." -Thomas Jefferson