Re: Proposal - Deferment of Changes from GR 2004-003
* Raul Miller (firstname.lastname@example.org) [040601 18:10]:
> On Tue, Jun 01, 2004 at 10:39:10AM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> > Reason: Please be specific what you want. As long as a GR doesn't say
> > that it might touch a foundation document, it doesn't do.
> It might be nice if the constitution (or some foundation document)
> said this.
Well, at the moment we definitly need to live with the current status.
In my opinion it's as this:
- If a GR has normal majority, and does not conflict with a foundation
document, it's ok.
- If a GR has 3:1 majority and specifies to (possible) override a
foundation document, it's ok.
- Everything else will create noise on d-vote, and should therefore be
avoided. (This is no statement about such a GR being acceptable -
I'm just more happy to don't discuss it to every detail.)
PGP 1024/89FB5CE5 DC F1 85 6D A6 45 9C 0F 3B BE F1 D0 C5 D1 D9 0C