Re: Constitutional amendment: Condorcet/Clone Proof SSD vote tallying
On Thu, 12 Jun 2003 00:48:13 +1000, Hamish Moffatt <firstname.lastname@example.org> said:
> I have serious concerns about this ballot. John Robinson's proposed
> amendment has been rejected by Manoj so according to the
> constitution it should be voted on. Further it seems to address some
> real problems in the new proposed system.
Have you missed:
A.1. Discussion and Amendment
1. Following the proposal, the resolution may be discussed.
Amendments may be made formal by being proposed and sponsored
according to the requirements for a new resolution, or directly by
the proposer of the original resolution.
1. The Developers follow the Standard Resolution Procedure, below. A
resolution or amendment is introduced if proposed by any Developer
and sponsored by at least K other Developers, or if proposed by
the Project Leader or the Technical Committee.
Now, as far as I can tell, John Robinson is not the Project
leader, or on the technical committee, so there was no formal
amendment to vote upon.
Any clod can have the facts, but having opinions is an Art. Mencken
[Having the facts is hard. --ed]
Manoj Srivastava <email@example.com> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024R/C7261095 print CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C