Re: Wording (was Re: md5sum <FILE produces spurious ` -' in output)
On Sat, May 22, 2004 at 12:08:01AM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Raul Miller writes ("Re: md5sum <FILE produces spurious ` -' in output"):
> > I do wish we has a better way of saying "request (or require [if we have
> > sufficient supermajority])".
> Perhaps we should just write `require' in draft resolutions, with the
> understanding that if they pass but not with the necessary
> supermajority the word `require' will be replaced with `request'.
>
> Or invent a new word like `requesquire' to serve as a placeholder, to
> be substituted after the vote :-).
You could do two resolutions:
We advise that in the technical committee's opinion <foo> is the
optimal solution.
and
We require the advice in the resolution <foo> be adopted.
and vote on them simultaneously. Or you could have the latter appear on
the same ballot as an amendment that replaces "request" with "require".
Having three different outcomes (pass, advise, require) on the same
yes/no vote seems kinda like cheating actually.
Cheers,
aj
--
Anthony Towns <aj@humbug.org.au> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
Don't assume I speak for anyone but myself. GPG signed mail preferred.
``Like the ski resort of girls looking for husbands and husbands looking
for girls, the situation is not as symmetrical as it might seem.''
Reply to: