Hi All,
Even though I'm out-going Chair, let me raise a couple of important points since it seems many Community members forgot or are ignoring them as too heated-up now.
Firstly, Our Policy Development Process is based on "Consensus", NOT "Voting" as clearly described in APNIC corporate document and web site.
Then, Sec 5.1 of SIG guideline shows basic steps to ask consensus, criteria to decide whether the proposal reached consensus, and how to address objections. Since it is long text, let me refer most important part.
2. If there are objections, the Chair can ask the dissenters to decide if their objections are:
i. Minor objections
If the proposal goes forward, the dissenters believe that some problems may occur for some members in the group.
The participants should work together to see if the proposal can be modified to overcome these minor objections. However, it is not always possible to overcome these objections. If this is the case, the Chair should ask the dissenters if they are prepared to acknowledge that the overall advantages of the proposal outweigh their objections and if the dissenters are willing to stand aside.
ii. Major objections
If the proposal goes forward, the dissenters believe that major problems will occur for parts of the community and that the proposal cannot be adopted in its current format.
The Chair should devote sufficient time for participants to discuss ways to overcome major objections. As in the case of minor objections, participants, including the proponent, should work together to develop solutions that overcome the objections.
As you can see, in case of major objections, it doesn't mention the possibility of "cannot overcome".
While no further text, it means all major objections have to be addressed to reach consensus by implications.
So, if somebody would scam CONFER (or even show-of-hands) somehow, a proposal may not reach to consensus if major objections are raised and cannot be addressed. However, in real, people are arguing # of supporters instead of considering objections.
Lastly, in both of minor/major objections case, SIG guideline asks participants including proponents and dissenters to work together as we can address the proponents' problem as well as the dissenters' objections. However, in these days, such co-working is very few and it is very sad situation for me.
Regards,
Matt