Re: Splitting out Choice #1 from vote_004

[Sven Luther <sven.luther@wanadoo.fr>]

On Tue, Sep 26, 2006 at 02:49:29AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 25, 2006 at 11:32:59PM +0200, Frans Pop wrote:
> > On Monday 25 September 2006 05:11, Don Armstrong wrote:
> > > Baring objection, I plan on calling for a vote with a suggested balot
> > > containing only this option in a few days (no later than 09-27).[1]
> > > [The Secretary, of course, can override this suggested ballot.]
> 
> > I strongly object to separating this proposal out and calling for a vote 
> > without any alternative proposals or amendments, for the foolowing reasons:
> 
> I agree with Don.  If this proposal is going to go to a vote, it should go
> to a vote separately from the votes about exceptions, so that we can get a
> clear answer to the exception question without the outcome being tainted by
> either voter confusion leading to strategic voting, or orthogonal statements
> that are widely supported by the community but which tell us nothing about
> what we should do for etch.
> 
> > 2) Without any alternatives, a vote on this proposal will be based purely on 
> > theory and ideals, without any discussion on the practical implications, 
> > for example on the usability of the Debian installation system for users 
> > with hardware that depends on sourceless firmware.
> 
> > 3) If the proposal is voted on on it's own, it is my belief that the vote 
> > will be heavily biassed towards accepting it. The reason for this is that 
> > for developers who have not followed the discussion on d-vote, this 
> > proposal will seem fairly innocent and the ideals it promotes are noble. 
> > Without a counterweight that shows the practical implications people will 
> > be inclined to support it without thoinking to much about it.
> 
> Neither of which matter, because having a vote on Don's proposal does not,
> procedurally speaking, prevent or delay us from moving forward with the
> (IMHO more important) vote on the question of an exception for etch.

So, you also agree that we need to :

  1) first vote on the exception for etch.

  2) in a second phase vote for what to do with non-free firmware ?

Or hold the votes simultaneously.

Friendly,

Sven Luther