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

Re: Filibustering general resolutions

<quote who="Manoj Srivastava" date="Tue, Sep 19, 2006 at 10:09:04AM -0500">
>         Due to a loop hole in the constitution, any group of 6 Debian
>  developers can delay any general resolution indefinitely by putting
>  up their own amendment, and every 6 days, making substantiative
>  changes in their amendment (they can just rotate between a small
>  number of very different proposals).
>         Previously, I had stated that I, in my role as secretary,
>  would set an deadline for proposals two weeks in the future, and any
>  proposals past the deadline would go no a separate ballot, in order
>  to break the filibuster, even though the constitution did not
>  specifically permit that.
>         I realize now that that would be a an egregious abuse of the
>  powers of the secretary, censorship, and grievously wrong
>  procedure. I am no longer willing to step in and break filibusters.

I think this is the correct decision.

>         The project should decide how it wants to handle filibustering,
>  if it feels like doing anything about it, of course.

It seems like there are only a few options. A fixed time-limit
(something large but not too large, perhaps a couple months) seems
like the natural solution.

>  But now, any GR has a veto contingent of only 6 developers.

It's only a veto if a malicious group does this *indefinitely* and
intentionally and I haven't seen evidence that this is happening or is
about to happen. Let me know if I've missed something.

This is a problem but it's one we've known about for a long time so I
don't really see things as being quite as urgent as you seem to.


Benjamin Mako Hill

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: