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

Re: The Sourceless software in the kernel source GR

Manoj Srivastava wrote:

>         Either it is preambulatory material, or it is part of the
>  resolution

If it is preambulatory material, then it is part of the resolution.

*There* lies the crux of the disagreement.

(If it is not part of the resolution, it might be *supplementary* material,
or *explanatory* material, or *reference* material, or *advocacy* material,
or whatever.)

>  -- their lies the crux of the  disagreement. I have no 
>  objection to including the full text of a resolution. I am not going
>  to add other material not part of the resolution to the web page.
>  This is not subject to debate any more. (However, this might just be
>  a matter of semantics, lost now under accusations of gross and
>  egregious abuse of power).

Yep, it's just semantics.  You're using the wrong definition of preamble: a
nonstandard one which nobody else uses.  

>> That is the state that <http://www.debian.org/vote/2006/vote_004>
>> was in last time I looked at it; anything not preceded by a number
>> had been elided, and each ballot option was prefaced by the
>> prejudicial statement that "[t]he actual text of the resolution is
>> as follows. Please note that this does not include preambles to the
>> resolutions, [...]", implying that preambles are not part of the
>> resolution and are not votable.
>         I am going to reinstate that paragraph, for it is certainly
>  true.

Actually, it's certainly false, as Branden Robinson has explained
with Supreme Court citations.

Nathanael Nerode  <neroden@fastmail.fm>

Bush admitted to violating FISA and said he was proud of it.
So why isn't he in prison yet?...

Reply to: