Re: First Call for votes: General resolution for the handling of the non-free section
On Tue, 9 Mar 2004 12:14:35 +1100, Craig Sanders <cas@taz.net.au> said:
> On Sun, Mar 07, 2004 at 06:55:38PM -0600, Debian Project Secretary
> wrote:
>> -=-=-=-=-=- Don't Delete Anything Between These Lines =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
>> [ ] Choice 1: Cease active support of non-free [3:1 majority needed]
>> [ ] Choice 2: Re-affirm support for non-free
>> [ ] Choice 3: Further Discussion
>> -=-=-=-=-=- Don't Delete Anything Between These Lines =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
> this vote is missing a "None of the above" option.
Typically, that options is present in DPL election ballots
(since it is required by the constitution). Non election GR ballots
have "Further Discussion", also mandated by the constitution.
Adding any other option to the ballot should go through the
normal process; since
a) I think it is pointless, voting further discussion ahead of
either proposition means that non of the proposals are
acceptable.
b) I think it would be an abuse of power for me to just tack the
option on wearing the secretaries hat.
> this is significant because it makes it impossible to put NOTA ahead
> of "Further Discussion".
If you wanted a non of the above option, you needed to propose
such an amendment, and get sponsors; the constitution is pretty clear
about required ballot options.
> NOTA should be on any call for votes, but especially any ballot that
> has a "Further Discussion" option should also have a "none of the
> above" option (aka the "STFU about it" option).
You should, then, propose the constitutional amendment GR, and
find sponsors.
manoj
--
If you've seen one redwood, you've seen them all. Ronald Reagan
Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@debian.org> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024R/C7261095 print CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C
Reply to: