Re: expiry announcement
I am of very mixed feelings about this announcement.
"Darren O. Benham" <secretary@debian.org> writes:
> Per section A.5 ("Expiry") of the constitution, both John Goerzen's General
> Resolution regarding non-free, and Anthony Towns's amendment thereto, have
> expired. The recent vote was conducted in error, and its ballots are
> hereby voided and the results have not been tabulated.
On the one hand, I am glad that you are, finally, following the
Constitution.
However, by the same token, I am EXTREMELY concerned and VERY unhappy
that YOUR own IRRRESPONSIBILITY and flagrant disregard of your duties,
responsibilities, and the Constitution have put us in this mess.
THE ONLY REASON IT EXPIRED WAS DUE TO YOUR OWN IRRESPONSIBILITY OR
PERSONAL BIAS.
I feel it is extremely disconcerting that our Secretary has the power
to kill any resolution he doesn't like simply by appearing to be gone
(whether he is or not). Furthermore, I find it even more surprising
that the Secretary did not feel that the amendment had expired prior
to conducting the vote, but after he has the results of the vote,
feels differently.
Finally, this pattern of ignorance, irresponsibility, or whatever you
want to call it is continuing in that both Branden's and Manoj's
proposals have ALSO been ignored in a similar fashion.
I think it may be time to investigate the possibility of replacing the
Secretary with a more responsible person, and furthermore, to amend
the Constitution to remove from the Secretary the ability to
single-handedly kill any GR that he doesn't like or doesn't feel
warrants his time.
--
John Goerzen <jgoerzen@complete.org> www.complete.org
Sr. Software Developer, Progeny Linux Systems, Inc. www.progenylinux.com
#include <std_disclaimer.h> <jgoerzen@progenylinux.com>
Reply to: