Re: Non-Constitutional Voting Procedure
On Thu, Sep 28, 2000 at 10:39:45AM -0700, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
> > I would reasonably assume (obviously a mistake when dealing with
> > bureacracies) that if the secretary needs to make a decision, they should
> > interpret the constitution, not throw it out and do whatever the hell they
> > want.
>
> And that's what the secretary did.
Prove it.
Show me where in the constitution it says that votes should be broken in
half and that ammendments may be voted on before the ballot for the
proposal they are attached to is posted. Show me where it says that the
social contract is anything other than a non-technical document and
deserving of any special treatment.
You can't because it ain't there. The only thing the constitution says
about any of this is that the secretary may make a decision. Apparently,
that decision need not be otherwise constitutional. I don't believe this
was intended. I don't believe it's right. And I'll be damned if I'm
going to simply ignore this precedent.
--
Joseph Carter <knghtbrd@debian.org> GnuPG key 1024D/DCF9DAB3
Debian GNU/Linux (http://www.debian.org/) 20F6 2261 F185 7A3E 79FC
The QuakeForge Project (http://quakeforge.net/) 44F9 8FF7 D7A3 DCF9 DAB3
<kira> is a surgical war where you go give the foreign troops nose jobs?
Reply to: