Subject: RE: [Seamoby] Paging Protocol Decision Description

From: "Pat R. Calhoun" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 08:51:07 -0800

>  First, I have not followed the debate. However, I find
 > unacceptable 
 >  that you would tell Behcet not to voice his opinion because he is
the
 >  only one doing so. 
hmm... Correct me if I am wrong, but where did I state that Behcet
couldn't voice his opinions? That was certainly not my intention. He
is entitled to say what he wants, but that won't necessarily change
the WG's decision (and that was my point).

 >  How do you get
 >  to the conclusion that the roughly 495 who are not participating
in this
 >  debate agree with you (and not Behcet) just because they shut up?
My point here was that there are plenty of folks on this list, and if
you look at the archives, many of them certainly have voiced their
opinions many times over. I haven't heard anything from those folks
either.

 >  Can you point to one debate where the rough consensus was reached
 >  by way of more than 250 favorable opinions?
Hmmm.. Perhaps you misread my statement. Read above.

 > I have seen proposals on
 >  this list (say car discovery reqs, for instance) decided by 2
people in favor,
 >  one against. For any outcome here to make sense, shouldn't the
definition
 >  of rough consensus be consistent?
Again, read above.

PatC

---

From: Cedric Westphal <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 09:38:00 -0800

Pat,

Pat R. Calhoun wrote:

>  
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> couldn't voice his opinions?
>
That was my interpretation of: 'how about we get to work and leave
this behind us'. Your co-chair did also call him a 'sour grape'.

> That was certainly not my intention. He
My point here is that these plenty of folks don't voice their support
to this process either. Behcet has counted Vijay and Rene supporting
him. I have not followed the debate, so please let me know who agreed
with this process, and that'd be the end of this.

> Hmmm.. Perhaps you misread my statement. Read above.
I did push your statement to the extreme. The point was consensus does
not go by absolute numbers, but relative numbers of for and against, 
especially
since on any topic, the very vast majority never says a thing.
Thanks,

Cedric.