Re: understanding consensus

["Philip J. Nesser II" <pjnesser@martigny.ai.mit.edu>]

Christopher Ambler supposedly said:
> 
> >I don't think it is reasonable to demand or expect that all communications
> >to the IAHC members be posted to the list.  Certainly any message posted to
> >the list should be publically available, but do you expect every IAHC
> >member to transcribe their phone calls, retype faxes in, or post private
> >email which many have been sent in confidence?
> 
> No, I don't suppose it is at that. But so much for a public process,
> then. 

I don't agree.  Every public process that I am aware of (in the US at
least,  others feel free to comment on other countries) has a series of
public hearings (similar to this list, the soliciation for proposals and
the open meeting at teh IETF) and a group of people who decide (the IAHC
here, but congrssional committee's and numerous other examples).  If I call
my congressman and give him my opinion I wouldn't expect that the specific
contents of that call to be entered into the public record, but I would
hope that my call would influence the way that they vote.

I may be wrong and would happy to have some specific examples of a public
process which is held to the levels of openness that you and some others
are proposing.  

--->  Phil