You are absolutely right.
But, our Charter does not say Majority, it says "Consensus" and "Full Consensus" which only leaves "No Consensus" whatever the size of Majority.
And hence, I read the poll as "No Consensus".
On 24 Feb 2016, 12:36 +0200, Roelof Meijer <Roelof.Meijer@sidn.nl>, wrote:
Eberhard,
I don’t think it is relevant at all whom’s objection or what size of
group’s opinion is originally at the basis of a majority opinion. It can
be a single bright person spotting a problem (or an error, as in this
case) everyone else failed to see, for all I care.
“a small fraction changes that for us"? Maybe you did not mean the poll,
but it is now the decisive factor. Check the numbers; nowhere near a
“small fraction”
Best,
Roelof
On 23-02-16 15:44, "Dr Eberhard W Lisse" <el@lisse.NA> wrote:
Roelof,
I didn't mean the poll, I meant the Board Objection cum Minority
Opinion and Resolution that gave rise to this.
With regards to your other messages, I believe that process matters.
First of all the Board (and Staff) should not have polled in the CCWG
on this issue created by the Board.
Secondly that two Board Members (one of them the CEO) do not register
as Participant but nevertheless poll as Participants bothers me on
principle.
Thirdly this is now the second time that we had Consensus on something
and a small fraction changes that for us. That bothers me. And not
only on principle.
el
On 2016-02-23 16:07, Roelof Meijer wrote:
Eberhard,
Check the poll results, it¹s not the board. CCWG members are
objecting to the inclusion of section (2).
I am offering theory nor explanation, but strangely enough, most of
those not objecting to its inclusion are (NCSG) participants, not
members of the CCWG
Best,
Roelof
On 23-02-16 13:25, "accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org on
behalf of Dr Eberhard W Lisse"
<accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org on behalf of
el@lisse.na> wrote:
So have your colleagues on the Board pull their objection.
el
On 2016-02-23 14:16, "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" wrote:
My only recommendation to all parties is please, be flexible enough
to find a fair compromise to enable moving forward. You have agreed
99 %. It would be a shame if in the last minute a remaining
controversial issue blocks the historical agreement.
Wolfgang
_______________________________________________
Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
--
Dr. Eberhard W. Lisse \ / Obstetrician & Gynaecologist (Saar)
el@lisse.NA / * | Telephone: +264 81 124 6733 (cell)
PO Box 8421 \ /
Bachbrecht, Namibia ;____/