Re: Repetitions and consensus

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

 



On 13 July 2011 08:51, Martin Rex <mrex@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> Trying to gauge "(rough) consensus" by counting voiced opinions when an
> issue has not been reliably determined to be non-technical and
> non-procedural _is_ inappropriate.

Note that the point of the paper is saying that people "feel" that
there is a widely held opinion, even if it comes from few repeated
voices and even if they are intellectually aware of the actual count.
So even if there is no actual conscious opinion counting going on, our
brains are doing it for us and it does influence us.

I think there is an important message there for the IETF, because the
establishment of consensus is not by any objective measure and this
science says that subjective measures can be influenced by repetition
and even if chairs/ADs are aware of this fact.   It shows that
subjective measures are subject to manipulation.

I think there is an important message there for the IETF, because the
establishment of consensus is not by any objective measure and this
science says that subjective measures can be influenced by repetition
and even if chairs/ADs are aware of this fact.   It shows that
subjective measures are subject to manipulation.

I think there is an important message there for the IETF, because the
establishment of consensus is not by any objective measure and this
science says that subjective measures can be influenced by repetition
and even if chairs/ADs are aware of this fact.   It shows that
subjective measures are subject to manipulation.
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf


[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]