<quote who="Manoj Srivastava" date="Tue, Sep 19, 2006 at 10:09:04AM -0500"> > Due to a loop hole in the constitution, any group of 6 Debian > developers can delay any general resolution indefinitely by putting > up their own amendment, and every 6 days, making substantiative > changes in their amendment (they can just rotate between a small > number of very different proposals). > > Previously, I had stated that I, in my role as secretary, > would set an deadline for proposals two weeks in the future, and any > proposals past the deadline would go no a separate ballot, in order > to break the filibuster, even though the constitution did not > specifically permit that. > > I realize now that that would be a an egregious abuse of the > powers of the secretary, censorship, and grievously wrong > procedure. I am no longer willing to step in and break filibusters. I think this is the correct decision. > The project should decide how it wants to handle filibustering, > if it feels like doing anything about it, of course. It seems like there are only a few options. A fixed time-limit (something large but not too large, perhaps a couple months) seems like the natural solution. > But now, any GR has a veto contingent of only 6 developers. It's only a veto if a malicious group does this *indefinitely* and intentionally and I haven't seen evidence that this is happening or is about to happen. Let me know if I've missed something. This is a problem but it's one we've known about for a long time so I don't really see things as being quite as urgent as you seem to. Regards, Mako -- Benjamin Mako Hill mako@debian.org http://mako.cc/
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature