Re: Social Contract GR's Affect on sarge
Manoj Srivastava writes ("Re: Social Contract GR's Affect on sarge"):
> On Mon, 3 May 2004 17:28:43 +0100, Ian Jackson <ian@davenant.greenend.org.uk> said:
> > * Our Secretary seems to be under the impression [...]
>
> Rubbish. In the case of the last GR, the sponsor had already
> called for a vote (twice, in fact, I asked that the vote be delayed
> the first time for for technical vote taking rasons, and he agreed).
Oh, my apologies. I hadn't realised that the sponsor had asked for a
vote.
> > I would ask all proposers and sponsors of resolutions to avoid
> > calling for a vote before reaching consensus on the wording of a
> > resolution.
>
> As far as I can tell, there was no dissent on the wording --
> indeed, there were no amendments being offered, and there was very
> little discussion happening.
Hrm. I didn't actually read that discussion myself at the time in any
detail; I got the impression from one of the posters to the most
recent thread that the `editorial changes' GR had been put to a vote
prematurely. Thanks for the correction.
Ian.
Reply to: