Re: CFV: Non-free archive removal
On Mon, Jul 03, 2000 at 10:26:18AM -0500, John Goerzen wrote:
> Craig Sanders <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> > your CFV is unconstitutional because nothing in the consitution allows
> > the Social Contract or DFSG to be amended.
> Nothing in the constitution specifically says that Craig Sanders can
> post to debian-vote, so your e-mail is unconstitutional.
1. the constitution doesn't define me or what i am capable of. the
constitution does, however, define debian. a significant difference.
2. you're wrong. from /usr/share/doc/debian/constitution.txt:
5. Proposals, sponsors, amendments, calls for votes and other formal
actions are made by announcement on a publicly-readable electronic
mailing list designated by the Project Leader's Delegate(s); any
Developer may post there.
debian-vote is the mailing list so designated, and i am a developer. the
constitution explicitly states that i may post here.
i am not surprised that you got that wrong too. your CFV is a result of
your lack of understanding of both debian and the debian constitution.
> Really, get a dose of reality here. It's not your decision to make,
> nor do the facts support your assertion.
the facts do support what i say. the debian constitution states what
documents may be created or modified by vote, yet fails to mention that
either the social contract or the DFSG may be so modified.
what this means is that you can't call for a vote to change either of
those two documents without first getting the constitution amended to
allow it. if the constitution does get amended to allow that then fine,
a vote may be held. if not, then such a vote may not be held and would
be invalid if it were.
finally, i ask you again: if you are so unhappy with debian as it is
and as it has been since the beginning then why don't YOU fork your own
project and run it according to your own preferences? you can get what
you want without fucking over the existing organisation. just do it
yourself. why do you feel the need to impose your own personal sense of
"morality" on everyone else?