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

Re: integrity of elections

Glenn McGrath <bug1@optushome.com.au> writes:

> On Mon, 24 Mar 2003 16:03:41 -0600
> Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@debian.org> wrote:
>> 	My original point was that people who do not actually
>>  exercise their franchise are unlikely to be one of the active set --
>>  and need to be looked at to see if they are indeed inactive. Having
>>  inactive members is not itself unhealthy, except it does inflate
>>  quorum a trifle, which can be bad in supermajority votes.
> I would like to see NM'ers who have been in the queue for more than 6 months
> be able to vote.

And why do you think this should be allowed?
I think we should investigate why they are so long
in the queue, but giving them voting rights per se is not
a good idea IMHO, as someone else already said, they could actually
face an rejection, and in that case they should obviously not be allowed
to vote.

  Mario | Debian Developer <URL:http://debian.org/>
        | Get my public key via finger mlang@db.debian.org
        | 1024D/7FC1A0854909BCCDBE6C102DDFFC022A6B113E44

Reply to: