[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

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

Russ Allbery <rra@debian.org> wrote:
> MJ Ray <mjr@phonecoop.coop> 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 partly the DPL's fault.
> Uh, 80/20 would generally be a consensus.

Not always.  It depends on the strength of views and actions of the 20.
If they'll stand aside, then it is.  If they object well, it isn't.

> 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 <the
> consensus was to go ahead>".  It's akin to "strong majority."

A few years ago, I would have probably agreed with that.  Sadly, it
doesn't work.  If your decision annoys the 20 so much that they will
attack the outcome, you've made a bad decision.  Sometimes bad decisions
are the only possible decisions, but I don't believe that's as common as 
the disputes under this DPL.

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 benefit - or maybe even any benefit.

> Compare the IETF rough consensus process, where it is explicitly
> acknowledged that there are often working group members who are part of
> the rough rather than the consensus.

Which explicit acknowledgement are you thinking of?

As I understood it, well-reasoned objections - even from a minority - can
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 seen.

> In any event, *this* particular vote and tempest is rapidly on its way to
> becoming moot through something that I think we can call consensus by any
> definition.

Probably, but I doubt it will be the last if this DPL continues.

My Opinion Only: see http://people.debian.org/~mjr/
Please follow http://www.uk.debian.org/MailingLists/#codeofconduct

Reply to: