Re: Analysis of the ballot options
>>>>> "RM" == Raul Miller <moth@debian.org> writes:
RM> On Mon, Jun 21, 2004 at 08:41:55AM +0200, Milan Zamazal wrote:
>> be abused by focusing on the exact wording of the SC. Taking the
>> wording literally and "solving" the problems by postponing or
>> reverting the SC changes looks like an ugly hack to me.
RM> At least three of the ballot options do not have this character.
One of the three is what I'm going to vote for. I've already mentioned
my objections to Proposal F. As for Proposal E, you're right it doesn't
modify the previous GR, but I still don't like it -- it pretends changes
in the social contract and adds another (possibly useless) Foundation
Document.
Regards,
Milan Zamazal
--
"Having GNU Emacs is like having a dragon's cave of treasures."
Robert J. Chassell
Reply to: