[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Ratifying the constitution

>>"Karl" == Karl M Hegbloom <karlheg@inetarena.com> writes:

 Karl>  I like the `test' idea also.  Perhaps there ought to be a clause
 Karl>  concerning that trial period, telling of what type of modifications
 Karl>  to our "program" will be allowed during that time, before the normal
 Karl>  ammendment procedure must be followed?

	I don't. I think it is about time that we did something about
 the constitution. We have had two separate discussion periods, and
 when there is no concrete discussion on _this_ list, that means that
 there is little anyone had to find to object to in the
 proposal. (which is why we are having that "what if there is a bug in
 the process" discussion).

	If there is a flaw, and enough people agree it is a flaw (2/3
 of the quorum), then there is no problem fixing it. Let us get on
 weith it already. I am tired of incessant delays when we try to
 implement anything.

	And this is worse. We can't find a concrete flaw, and we want
 to delay "just in case ...". 

 Karl>  Uhhh... see any dictators or figureheads anywhere?  :-)

	No, please, not again. Our last figurehead dictator went down
 in flames about this time last year. I have not healed yet.

 pass the constitution. We have better things to do, and some need
 constitutional processes.
 "Die?  I should say not, dear fellow.  No Barrymore would allow such
 a conventional thing to happen to him." John Barrymore's dying words
Manoj Srivastava  <srivasta@acm.org> <http://www.datasync.com/%7Esrivasta/>
Key C7261095 fingerprint = CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05  CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E

Reply to: