On Sun, Nov 02, 2003 at 08:58:06AM -0500, Raul Miller wrote: > [3] The trivial "defense" against this "tactic" is to propose a new > amendment that combines both the original option and this new option. > > This addresses the cases where the amendment is relevant and perhaps, > in some people's eyes, a better idea than the original proposal. That's not a case of interest to me in the immediate discussion, though. I'd describe the above behavior as normal, expected, and healthy. There's a reason the term "irrelevant amendments" is in the Subject: header. :) -- G. Branden Robinson | There's no trick to being a Debian GNU/Linux | humorist when you have the whole branden@debian.org | government working for you. http://people.debian.org/~branden/ | -- Will Rogers
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature