Re: RFC: General resolution: Clarify the status of the social contract
On Sat, Dec 20, 2008 at 02:52:03PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
>
> As far as voting for a position statement along the lines of "the social
> contract doesn't matter, we'll upload Microsoft Word into main, yay!",
> I believe that would also require a simple majority (1:1) to pass,
What you're saying is basicaly that a technicality can turn the 3:1
requirement in the Constitution into a simple majority requirement?
I'm not sure if this is so, but if it is, I think it's unfortunate that we
have such language in the Constitution. IMO it should be either removed
for consistency or fixed so that it actually has the intended effect.
--
Robert Millan
The DRM opt-in fallacy: "Your data belongs to us. We will decide when (and
how) you may access your data; but nobody's threatening your freedom: we
still allow you to remove your data and not access it at all."
Reply to: