QUOTE(Kelly Martin @ Mon 13th July 2009, 11:05pm)
What I find really interesting in reading the comments on the RfC and its talk page is that Wikipedians in general appear to be remarkably stupid people. Does nobody in this entire pit of despair understand the utility of a discussion group or an exploratory committee? It's quite common for bodies corporates to establish a committee and charge it to "investigate options and report". Such a committee has no "authority" to do anything, and yet such committees are both commonplace and essential.
Well said.
Y'know, the main reason I voted in favor of this proposal was so that we could get a group of diverse folks to be repeat players for discussing policy issues. If such a group could make some well-supported recommendations, it seemed like there's a good chance that the community could bear it under an inclusive referendum.
There are two problems with "consensus" on Wikipedia. The first is that a small number of individuals can derail any discussion for any reason. The second is the super-majorities required to pass anything. We can do nothing about the second problem, but I think a committee could get a productive agenda-driven dialog going.