Re: Constitution - formal proposal (v0.5)
Ian Jackson wrote:...
> 4.2. Procedure
>
> 1. ... seconded by at least K other developers, ..
> 4. ... There is a quorum of 3Q.
> 6. Q is half of the square root of the number of current developers.
> K is Q or 5, whichever is the smaller.
Q will very rarely be an integer; how should it be rounded? This will make
a difference of 3 to the quorum - better to decide before it arises in
practice.
> 4.2. Procedure
> 3. Votes are taken by the Project Secretary. Votes and tallies
> results are not be revealed during the voting period; after the
> vote the Project Secretary lists all the votes cast. The voting
> period is 2 weeks, but may be varied by up to 1 week by the
> Project Leader, and may be ended by the Project Secretary when the
> outcome of a vote is no longer in doubt.
> 4. The minimum discussion period is 2 weeks, but may be varied by up
> to 1 week by the Project Leader. The Project Leader has only a
> casting vote. There is a quorum of 3Q.
If it is possible to change your vote, there is no need to keep the tallies
secret, since the same information is available to all voters. If there
is an extended voting period of a mximum of 3 weeks, it is highly likely
that further argument may lead people to want to change their vote; this
constitution does not explicitly permit a change of vote.
The balance of the voting may tell the proponent of a losing argument
that he needs to improve his argument or presentation. I would rather see
public tallies with a fixed cut-off date.
>
>5. Project Leader
>
> 5.1. Powers
>
> The Project Leader may:...
> 2. Lend authority to other developers.
> The Project Leader may make statements of support for points of
> view or for other members of the project, when asked or otherwise;
> these statements have force if and only if the Leader would be
> empowered to make the decision in question.
What does this actually mean? Does the Leader's statement have the
effect of making the decision?
> 10. Together with SPI, make decisions affecting Debian's property.
> (See s.9.1.)
I think (any lawyers in the house?) that you should not allow any
implication that Debian owns any property or has any income. Otherwise
you may find yourself with an unexpected and unwelcome Corporation
Tax demand, addressed to you as an officer of an unincorporated
association deemed to be controlled from the United Kingdom. SPI
may hold property in trust for certain purposes, but not for Debian
as an entity, or the tax consequences may follow... The involvement
of an offshore trust may make things even worse: I'm not up-to-date
on my tax law.
...
> 9.2. Management of Debian's property
>
> 1. SPI will hold Debian's money, trademarks and other tangible and
> intangible property and manage other affairs requiring legal
> personality, tax exempt status or the like.
> 2. Such property will be accounted for separately and held in trust
> for Debian.
> 3. SPI does not spend money or otherwise dispose of or use Debian's
> property without permission from Debian, which may be granted by
> the Project Leader or by General Resolution of the Developers.
> 4. SPI will consider spending money or disposing of Debian's property
> when asked to do so by the Project Leader.
> 5. SPI will spend money or dispose of Debian's property when asked to
> do so by a General Resolution of the Developers.
> 6. SPI will notify the Project when it spends money or disposes of
> Debian's property.
See above!
--
Oliver Elphick Oliver.Elphick@lfix.co.uk
Isle of Wight http://www.lfix.co.uk/oliver
PGP key from public servers; key ID 32B8FAA1
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: