Re: Technical Committee proposed GRs, and amendments, again
Ian Jackson <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> What would you think of TC resolutions to start GRs along the
> following lines ?
> 2. It is not practical for the TC to vote to accept/reject individual
> amendments to the GR proposal. The TC would wish to delegate its
> power to accept amendments, to avoid needing the collection of
> sponsors for uncontroversial changes. However the Secretary has
> advised that this is not constitutionally acceptable.
> Therefore, to achieve roughly the same effect, the TC makes the
> following promise. If any TC member gives notice that the TC
> accepts an amendment, then at least one of the following will
> (a) the TC will use its own power under A.1(1) to arrange that
> the amendment appears on the GR ballot as an option;
> (b) the TC will use its power under A.1(1) to propose and
> its power under A.1(2) to accept the amendment, so that
> the amendment is incorporated in the version voted on; or
> (c) A member of the TC will publicly notify the amendment's
> proposer that the amendment will not be accepted after all.
> In this case TC will wait at least 7 more days before calling
> for a vote, to give time for the amendment's proposer to
> collect sponsors.
How would we go about doing those things? I assume that, given the
constitutional requirement, the TC does actually need to vote on
amendments, so we would implement this by possibly batching up the
amendments that we think we want to accept or make options and then voting
Russ Allbery (email@example.com) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>