On Wed, Mar 08, 2006 at 11:35:23AM +0000, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Anthony Towns writes ("Re: Bug#353277: ndiswrapper in main"):
> > On Tue, Mar 07, 2006 at 07:39:01PM +0000, Ian Jackson wrote:
> > > Anthony Towns writes ("Re: Bug#353277: ndiswrapper in main"):
> > > > [draft resolution]
> > > I'm afraid I think that that's quite out of order.
> > > Constitution s6.3(3):
> > > 3. Public discussion and decision-making.
> > > Discussion, draft resolutions and amendments, and votes by
> > > members of the committee, are made public on the Technical
> > > Committee public discussion list. There is no separate secretary
> > > for the Committee.
> > The "tweaks" stuff were "draft resolutions" too, though... I don't see how
> > it's feasible to have the rule be we can't do drafting work here, rather
> > than just be "any drafting work we do here has no constitutional meaning".
> Our discussions, which include drafting work, are supposed to be
> public. The Committee isn't supposed to hide in secret and then come
> out with decisions. `Discussion .... [is] made public ...'.
> The `tweaks' stuff is to do with how the committee operates, and was
> similar enough to the question of appointments (which we can discuss
> in secret) that I let it slide.
Hrm, alright. Then I guess in future I don't think we should let that
slide. And hey, if we're going to have a rotating chair, appointments
don't matter much either and we could drop the -private list entirely :)
Cheers,
aj
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature