On 9 Dec 2011, at 00:36, Immo 'FaUl' Wehrenberg wrote:
As much as I like to see this policy change implemented and as much as I disagree with Geza, technically if someone is opposing (and I think all would agree that it was not trolling), then that is technically not an consensus.
No. You're describing unanimity: where everyone agrees or at least nobody objects. Consensus is when there's a lack of sustained, reasonable objection. That's the usual working definition used in most consensus-driven organisations, which includes RIPE. We can have consensus in RIPE without having unanimity. A single voice of complaint cannot be allowed to mean we can't declare consensus. Nobody at RIPE can have a veto on policy making. If they did, that would be utterly unworkable. IMO, the concerns Geza raised -- and has since withdrawn? -- fail to pass the test of sustained, reasonable objection. Nobody else seemed to support his position. Incidentally, consensus in a WG is whatever its chairs decide is consensus. That's why they're there. :-) And why there are further steps in the PDP to check that decision. If a small number object to a proposal that otherwise has overwhelming support, the WG chairs can quite reasonably declare consensus on that proposal.