From: "Mike" Mike@cybermaus.com
He then tried to edit the [[Consensus]] page to
redefine what a consensus
is, forcing the comment Angela,
Changing the definition on the [[consensus]]
page
won't help Buddha . . .
[[User:Angela|Angela]] 18:04, Sep 14, 2003 (UTC)
In spite of all the irritation he has caused, I would still have been inclined to give him the benefit of doubt, but the above cited act brands him as a troll in my opinion.
Mike AKA CyberMaus
Have you look at the page in question
([[consensus]]),
its history, and the talk page ?
Anthere
Yes. I've just gone through it again and I hold to my opinion. What he wrote on the [[consensus]] page is not wrong. What bothers me is that he did it to justify his previous actions in spite of what is written in the rest of the article. See the second paragraph in the "consensus as collective thought" section, in particular the last sentence.
So, you mean that in spite the fact he is not wrong, in spite the fact Angela has agreed he was not wrong, "the above cited act brands him as a troll" anyway.
And you further justify it by the fact what he put down (not wrong) is perhaps not consistant with other things written down in the article.
Do you mean he should also have edited what was below to make it more fit ?
As I said, what he wrote is not wrong, but in my experience I have never heard or seen the word consensus used to mean unanimous. In Meriam-Webster, it is also mentioned that this usage is "slightly older". In my opinion, it is obsolete.
I did. Several times.
Such as "C'est un processus dans lequel aucune d�cision ne peut �tre prise tant que tous les participants ne l'acceptent."
Which means "it is a processus in which no decision may be taken as long as all participants do not agree"
Or " Lors d'une d�cision consensuelle, il peut y avoir diff�rents degr�s d'accord et de nombreuses nuances au regard des engagements que les diff�rents membres assument par rapport � une d�cision d�termin�e, cependant le tout a lieu de fa�on explicite et globalement accept�. "
Which means "When there is consensus, there may be different degree of agreement, and many nuances as regards acceptance of a decision by the different participants. However, the whole must be globally accepted"
But right, this is an ideal, and agreement by all is hard to achieve. We seek the ideal.
Here's another possible meaning: A minority holds an opinion to which the majority have no objection or differing opinion, thus the minority opinion is presented as consensus.
Of course, since it is globally accepted
Anthere
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com