Re: Proposal: The DFSG do not require source code for data, including firmware
Steve Langasek <email@example.com> wrote: [...]
> Our voting mechanism is *clone*proof, preventing multiple identical ballot
> options from influencing the outcome; but it's not proofed against influence
> by toothless variants that will inevitably appeal to a broader constituency
> because they say less of substance.
If you think the Debian voting system handles compound resolutions badly,
then why did you propose one? Hadn't you noticed that thread before?
I want to read the Debian Voting System (J.Voss?) again before saying
whether or not this is the case, but *if* you have harmed the chances of
your proposal by unnecessarily making it a compound resolution instead
of two independent simple resolutions, then I think that's justice.
My Opinion Only: see http://people.debian.org/~mjr/
Please follow http://www.uk.debian.org/MailingLists/#codeofconduct