Re: RFD: amendment of Debian Social Contract
On Tue, 4 Nov 2003 15:58:40 -0500, Branden Robinson <email@example.com> said:
>> Now, if this were part of the ballot; if I could chose
>> a) remove clause 5, but do not remove non-free from the archive
>> b) remove clause 5, and clear the way to remove non-free as well
>> then yes, we can remove clause 5, and clearly know whether or not
>> there was a mandate.
> I'm confused; you just said we clearly know anyway -- "people
> overwhelmingly voting to remove clause 5 would still mean a mandate
> for removal of non free.".
Only when I did not have a choice where I can state what I
wanted. My proposal allows people to chose to remove clause 5 and
explicitly state that they do not want to remove non-free.
In which level of metalanguage are you now speaking?
Manoj Srivastava <firstname.lastname@example.org> <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