Re: Denied vote and the definition of a DD
[Please follow debian list policy and refrain from Cc:'ing me. I'm
subscribed to way too many lists.]
On Fri, 18 Mar 2005, Taral wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 18, 2005 at 02:10:28PM -0800, Don Armstrong wrote:
> > First and formost, this discussion doesn't belong on -legal at all, as
> > -legal isn't the body responsible for interpreting the constitution.
> > That's the Secretary's job under 7.1.3. Forwarding to -vote as that
> > (or possibly -project) is the correct list.
>
> That's funny. The Secretary appears to be of the opinion that he
> cannot "make up rules".
The Secretary does not make up rules.[1] The Secretary can only apply
and interpret the rules in the constitution. [How you get to "make up
rules" from "interpreting the constitution" is rather interesting, but
the logic behind it need not be expounded.]
> > > 1. Whence does the requirement for signed votes come from?
> >
> > Via 7.1.1 and A.6.1
>
> That would imply that the Secretary can accept votes by other means.
> It also implies that the Secretary could insist that all votes be
> communicated by comments on a bank wire transfer.
Presumably, but that would be kind of insane. Obviously the whole
system does not function if the Secretary becomes Vishnu[2] and
decides that the Constitution really says that chaos should reign.
> > > 4. What defines who is and is not a Debian Developer?
> >
> > Having control of a valid key in the keyring is pretty much the de
> > facto definition of a Debian Developer.
>
> I don't think so. The document you quote below indicates that loss
> of control of the key does not invalidate one's status as a DD.
No, it merely means that we can no longer assertain if you actually
are a DD or someone merely claiming to be a former one. That is to
say, your status as a DD is indeterminant until you are in control of
a valid key in the keyring.
Don Armstrong
1: Well, at least not rules that contravene what the Constitution
says.
2: I'm sure Manoj will correct my lack of understanding of theology
here.
--
An elephant: A mouse built to government specifications.
-- Robert Heinlein _Time Enough For Love_ p244
http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu
Reply to: