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

Re: [BALLOT] Social Contract Change Amendment

On Mon, Oct 09, 2000 at 07:49:19PM -0500, Debian Project Secretary wrote:
> These instructions are a little clearer....

Since the meanings of "Choice 1" and "Choice 2" exchanged meanings, I
assume that all votes cast with the first ballot will be discarded and the
submitters asked to vote again using the second ballot?

In the first ballot, one was asked to consult John's CFV message for more
info on Choice 1, and Anthony's proposed amendment to John's GR for Choice

In the second ballot, one is asked to vote "Choice 1: Yes" to accept
Anthony's amendmened version of John's GR, and "Choice 2: No" to accept
John's GR in its original proposed form.

Also, it is still not clear to what question the ballot answers of "yes" or
"no" are being given.  It doesn't seem like that simple a matter, since a
person could disagree with both Anthony's amendment and John's GR.

How about trying a third time, with:

Choice 1: John Goerzen's proposed General Resolution
Choice 2: Anthony Towns's amended form

(Or put AJ's first if you want; whatever.)

It seems a gross oversimplification to associate one of these two fairly
complex proposals with the word "YES" and the other "NO".  Ever seen the
film _Agency_?

G. Branden Robinson             |
Debian GNU/Linux                |             //     // //  /     /
branden@debian.org              |             EI 'AANIIGOO 'AHOOT'E
http://www.debian.org/~branden/ |

Attachment: pgphGLZkdJ1_9.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: