Re: Draft for a non-fee poll (Was: Re: Let's vote already...)
On Fri, Jan 09, 2004 at 08:54:32AM -0600, John Goerzen wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 09, 2004 at 03:26:44PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
> > > Why would we want something non-binding? I cannot think of a single
> > > situation in which that will actually resolve anything.
> >
> > Why not ?
> >
> > Once we have the result of this, first it will put a stop to the whole
> > speculation on what the DDs really want and enable us to go forward
> > constructively than all this mess that is surrounding this question, and
> > second, we can then propose a 3:1 social contract GR, which will benefit
> > from an idea of what will happen later.
>
> But we could just as well propose a 3:1 social contract GR now, without
> the intervenng lag of a poll, and let it stand or fall on its own
> merits; and if people prefer to have some other wording, amendments can
> be proposed under the procedures we already have.
Ah, sure, but see what happened last time this came up.
And it would be hypocrit. The real issue is what do we want to do about
non-free, not that we want to ammend the social contract. Without
clarifying our position on this, the social contract GR will probably
fail, and if it pass, it would be by fooling the voters about the real
intentions of the GR, like Branden tried to do.
Also, i believe that simple questions deserve simple votes, without the
word playing that has gone into the social contract GR.
> > Like, you know, if the majority of the DDs want to keep non-free, then
> > there is no sense in having the social contract GR remove the words
> > about the non-free issue, and we can have a clean GR which only does the
> > nice cosmetic changes Branden has proposed.
>
> We can have both, even without the poll; one GR and one hostile
> amendment that get voted on at once.
Sure, but at least it would clarify the argumentation. People from one
camp could not continue argumenting that they do it for the benefit of
the debian project, while a majority of voting DDs has opposed it, as at
least one camp is doing right now.
> I personally would not see an informal poll as necessarily indicitive of
> how the results would play out in a formal vote. I suspect others would
> share that sentiment.
Sure, but it should orient how we approach the formal votes, and what
exactly will be voted on. And it would put an end of this endless
bickering. I somehow believe that a majority of the DDs are of the
opinion that 'let's vote on something, so that this stupid flammage no
stops'. Notice that the non-free has not yet obtained enough seconds.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
Reply to: