Re: GRs, irrelevant amendments, and insincere voting
On Sun, 2 Nov 2003 08:52:12 -0500, Anthony DeRobertis <asd@suespammers.org> said:
> On Nov 1, 2003, at 23:39, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>>
>> Why are they not in seperate votes, which would be the proper
>> procedure?
> Because option B is an "amendment" of option A under A.1.1 and
> A.1.3.
Only if they are related. If they are related, there should
be combinations available as options; A, B, A+B. If they are not
related, they are on separate ballots. And, even if it were not so,
After B passes, there is nothing to prevent trying A again.
manoj
--
"The light that burns twice as bright lasts half as long, and you have
burned so very, very bright, Roy!" Doctor Eldon Tyrell, in Blade
Runner
Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@debian.org> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024R/C7261095 print CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C
Reply to:
- References:
- Re: GRs, irrelevant amendments, and insincere voting
- From: Anthony DeRobertis <asd@suespammers.org>
- Re: GRs, irrelevant amendments, and insincere voting
- From: Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@debian.org>
- Re: GRs, irrelevant amendments, and insincere voting
- From: Anthony DeRobertis <asd@suespammers.org>
- Re: GRs, irrelevant amendments, and insincere voting
- From: Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@debian.org>
- Re: GRs, irrelevant amendments, and insincere voting
- From: Anthony DeRobertis <asd@suespammers.org>
- Re: GRs, irrelevant amendments, and insincere voting
- From: Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@debian.org>
- Re: GRs, irrelevant amendments, and insincere voting
- From: Anthony DeRobertis <asd@suespammers.org>