Re: Call for votes for "GR: : Handling source-less firmware in the Linux kernel"
On Wed, Oct 11, 2006 at 01:16:39AM -0700, Don Armstrong wrote:
> On Wed, 11 Oct 2006, Sven Luther wrote:
> > On Sat, Oct 07, 2006 at 06:52:41PM -0500, Debian Project Secretary wrote:
> > > - - -=-=-=-=-=- Don't Delete Anything Between These Lines =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
> > > c2d43675-9efa-4809-a4aa-af042b62786e
> > > [ ] Choice 1: Release Etch even with kernel firmware issues
> > Manoj, you have again overstepped your Secretarial position, by
> > issuing a misleading title for the proposal you propose.
> When Frederik accepted the proposed amendment, Manoj was no longer the
> proposer. Furthermore, the title of a voting option on the ballot is
> perfectly meaningless. Attempts by the secretary to make them
It may be meaningless, but i strongly believe it is misleading the voters if
the title is the opposite of what the proposal actually says.
And since Manoj hurried the vote out, while he knew there was further
discussion ongoing, because he didn't like other proposals which where being
proposed, i think he is at least coupable of manipulation, since most voters
will chose one or the other option, to get this issue out of the way and not
have to worry.
This is as strong a manipulation of the voting system as was done in the
"syntactic change" days, and if this one passes, i think we should find a new,
more neutral, secretary, who can be thrusted to not let his own personal
preferences over the votes being held, get in the way of his secretarial
> informative are appreciated, but any voter who actually pays any
> attention to them should be voting the null ballot, as they clearly
> haven't informed themselves appropriately.
Yeah, this is Manoj's defense, but the reality is elsewhere, because the
secretary is well respected, and helds a position thrusted by most voters.
> Finally, there's no reason to crosspost this stuff to multiple lists;
> complaints about the form of the ballot belong on -vote.
I believe that the debian-kernel should be informed, since most people there
will wake with a serious chock if this option passes, and it is contrary to
our express wishes, as stated in our statement of position on this issue, as
for the rest, i just did a group-reply.