Re: Draft for a non-fee poll (Was: Re: Let's vote already...)
On Sat, Jan 10, 2004 at 07:11:50PM +0000, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 09, 2004 at 01:26:30PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
> > Since the non-free GR and the social contract modification GR
> > encountered nothing but flamewar,
>
> [...]
>
> > Furthermore, i believe that the real issue is the non-free issue, and
> > that the social contract GR is only a way to achieve a solution to the
> > non-free GR,
>
> These two remarks show an acute lack of comprehension of the proposals
Well, the record breaking flamewar that ensued didn't help understand
them at least, but i think you are wrong. I still wait your true
proposal, as to propose ammendments. This has still not happened though.
> presently on the table (there are several ways to parse it; if it
> refers to the proposals I am currently working on, only one of which
> is currently tabled, then it's staggeringly wrong). There are no
> active or draft proposals that do not modify the social contract.
Yep i understand that. But the real issue is not the social contract,
but what do we, we as the debian project, with majority (and probably a
3:1 super majority at that) intent to do about the non-free archives.
If a decision is taken on that, we can let the rest to the word fiddlers
and the actual social contract vote will just be one to make sure that
the intentions of the non-free vote was not corrupted in the
formalization.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
Reply to: