Re: Draft ballot for the assets constitutional GR
On Mon, 11 Sep 2006 19:28:15 +0100, MJ Ray <firstname.lastname@example.org> said:
> Previously, the proposal has been named on the ballot, such as:
Very short proposal, so full text was on the ballot as
well. Also, more than a up/down vote.
The full text does not seem to be present on this one -- but
there were multiple options, so needed names to disambiguate.
> and even when there's only one option:
> Also, if there is no material from the proposal in the ballot, how
> do the wordings "consequently" decide the form of it? (constitution
>>>>> However, the final decision on the form of ballot(s) is the
Apparently, the proposer and the secretary both felt that the
form on the ballot was OK -- or do you have a better idea what the
proposer of the GR wanted?
> Finally, if comments are unwelcome, why bother posting a draft
> ballot with a message that suggests it's OK to comment?
I never said comments were not welcome. I also never said I'd
blindly agree to whatever people commented.
"You know, we've won awards for this crap." David Letterman
Manoj Srivastava <email@example.com> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C