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

Re: Thanks and Decision making working group (was Re: General Resolution: Statement regarding Richard Stallman's readmission to the FSF board result)

* Wouter Verhelst <wouter@debian.org> [2021-04-20 13:50]:
Not sure whether you consider this an issue, but I don't see that as a
problem. There is a difference between "we can't reach an agreement and
therefore decide on a no-outcome vote" (which the default option is),
and "we have considered all the options and decide that a no-outcome
vote is the best result" (which an explicit no-outcome ballot option

I think the RMS vote was somewhat unique, because (intentional or not)
the options ended up in way that was almost equivalent to asking "on a
scale from -3 to 3, how strongly should Debian as organization react to
the RMS reinstatement".  I would consider the outcome the neutral (0)
option, and FD would have been the NULL option, i.e., "we can't/won't
decide".  If Steve's original intent to have a binary decision for
signing the open letter had prevailed, an additional "no" option would
not have been nearly as useful.


⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀   ╭────────────────────────────────────────────────────╮
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁   │ Timo Röhling                                       │
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀   │ 9B03 EBB9 8300 DF97 C2B1  23BF CC8C 6BDD 1403 F4CA │
⠈⠳⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀   ╰────────────────────────────────────────────────────╯

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: