> On Nov 1, 2024, at 1:13 PM, Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:
>
> I think Christopher nailed it. Now when I think of it the difference is
> that consensus is **not** a vote. It's a belief that we have an agreement
> and if someone disagrees, then we can start voting (or discussing).
>
> Maybe (proposal) renaming it to "unanimous vote" would be better. And keep
> consensus to "agreement with no vote even started".
>
> That would make much more sense IMHO. It still leaves the question "should
> PMC members be voted via unanimous or majority vote?" - but that sentence
> makes so much more sense if we use "unanimous" here.
Do we have consensus on when unanimous (actually no vetoes) vs. majority votes
are to be used?
We probably have more discussion about when vetoes are and are not appropriate.
They are often quite poisonous when used.
1. PMC votes on committers and committee membership there are probably more
reasons for requiring unanimity.
2. In Technical choices unanimity is more often a Bad Idea™
If we are actually having a [DISCUSS] phase as a consensus reaching discussion
where we actually listen to each other legitimate concerns will prevent a vote
and no vetoes are needed.
I liked Jarek’s history lesson about vetoes in the Polish-Lithuanian
Commonwealth.
If we MUST mention both majority and unanimous the specify majority first.
Best,
Dave
>
> J.
>
> On Fri, Nov 1, 2024 at 8:25 PM Christopher <ctubb...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> I agree consensus is a core value, and I think that word makes sense to use
>> when describing the important practice of building consensus.
>>
>> However, I also agree that the term, used as a type of vote, as in
>> "consensus vote" is confusing and ambiguous. I would be in favor of
>> updating the docs around voting to avoid using "consensus" to describe a
>> kind of vote, but I would suggest keeping the word around to describe the
>> value and importance of consensus building, prior to and during a vote.
>>
>> On Thu, Oct 31, 2024, 21:56 Keith N. McKenna
>> <keith.mcke...@comcast.net.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> On 2024-10-31 at 19:17, "Dave Fisher" <w...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>> On Oct 31, 2024, at 2:28 PM, Craig Russell <apache....@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> I would be in favor of removing "consensus" from our documentation.
>>>>>
>>>>> It has a general meaning of "group agreement" which is not how we use
>> it
>>> here.
>>>>>
>>>>> I would propose using "unanimous" instead of "consensus" as there
>> seems
>>> to
>>> be no ambiguity about unanimity.
>>>>
>>>> Consensus is a great term and is what we do. We don’t do unanimity, we
>>> find
>>> an acceptable path by working towards Consensus. We should avoid Votes if
>>> at
>>> all possible.
>>>>
>>>> To me Consensus is a Core value of the ASF and without it I have no
>>> interest
>>> in the Foundation.
>>>>
>>>> Best,
>>>> Dave
>>>>
>>>
>>> +1 from me
>>>
>>> Regards
>>> Keith
>>>
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@community.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@community.apache.org
>>>
>>>
>>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@community.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@community.apache.org
