On Tue, Jun 10, 2003 at 06:59:29AM -0400, Neil Roeth wrote:
> Your comments in conjunction with the snippets from the Constitution that you
> posted a couple of days ago lead to a reasonable and obvious interpretation.
> Do you, or do you not think we should run the vote as you described there?
I really don't care; getting overly bothered by process isn't the
way to get things done. We've already had an incredibly lengthy and
thorough debate about it, and come up with a fairly good plan about what
to do. As it is, it's clear that the current system doesn't work well
(you'll note how both Richard and Manoj, who were both around when
the constitution's GR procedure was drafted, and have stayed active
in the project since then, both managed to miss the "clear and obvious
interpretation" of how to run a GR), and everybody who's been serious
about fixing it has pretty much agreed with the current proposal - to
the best of my knowledge there was only one (fairly minor) amendment
proposed, which received only only one second.
(Hrm, is there any chance we could get proposed amendments recorded on
the vote.debian.org page in future, even if they haven't received enough
seconds? Following -vote is pretty unreasonable. Having "Argument For"
and "Argument Against" summaries on the vote.debian.org page would be
nice too.)
Cheers,
aj
--
Anthony Towns <aj@humbug.org.au> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred.
``Dear Anthony Towns: [...] Congratulations --
you are now certified as a Red Hat Certified Engineer!''
Attachment:
pgp4GRsGVdZ7V.pgp
Description: PGP signature