Re: First call for votes for the Lenny release GR
On Thu, 18 Dec 2008, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> On Wed, 17 Dec 2008, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> > On Tue, Dec 16 2008, Richard Hartmann wrote:
> > > I think he had the implied accussation from the GR's text in
> > > mind. Option 1 is to 'Reaffirm the Social Contract', which means
> > > that dissenting votes weaken and/or break the SC. No idea if
> > > that is on purpose or a honest mistake, but I am assuming good
> > > faith with Manoj as with everyone else.
> >
> > The title for ballot lines are proposed by the proposer when
> > titling their proposals. Ask the proposer.
>
> Stop this. “It's not me, it's the proposer” is childish. It's not
> too difficult to see whether a summary is fair or not. It's not too
> difficult to acknowledge the problem when others have pointed it
> out.
Considering the sheer level of vitriol and claims of malfeance
directed at the Secretary, it's no wonder the Secretary has decided to
utilize the title proposed by the proposer and defer to the proposer
in matters of the ballot title. Furthermore, we're talking about a
*TITLE* here, not a *SUMMARY*. There's no way that four words can
possibly summarize a 111 word proposal.
> Have you ever tried to reach consensus in you secretarial work
> instead of doing only what you feel like doing?
The ballot was and its options were made public with a chance for
everyone to review and make comments well before the vote.
You made comments, and in
<874p1a6l0n.fsf@anzu.internal.golden-gryphon.com> were instructed to
get the approval of the proposer of the option in order for the
secretary to change the title of the option. FWICT, you either did not
attempt to do so, or none of the people who proposed or seconded the
proposal agreed with your suggested change. That's of course your
option, but berating the Secretary for failing to try to reach
consensus when you haven't either after having been asked to do so
seems disingenuous.
Finally, I would seriously hope that anyone who has voting rights in
Debian is fully capable of completely ignoring the title of the ballot
option and actually reading the text of the issue under discussion, as
no ballot title can possibly convey the entirety of the issue under
discussion nor the portions of the issue that are of most significant
to each voter. I know I do due dilligence before voting; if anyone
can't for whatever reason, vote a blank ballot.
Don Armstrong
--
To punish me for my contempt of authority, Fate has made me an
authority myself
-- Albert Einstein
http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu
Reply to: