[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Amendment to: reduce the length of DPL election process


On Sun, Aug 12, 2007 at 03:27:14PM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 12, 2007 at 01:27:12PM +0100, MJ Ray wrote:
> > Wouter Verhelst <wouter@debian.org> wrote:
> > > On Thu, Aug 09, 2007 at 10:25:11AM +0100, MJ Ray wrote:
> > > > Note that there could still be up to three weeks for discussion after
> > > > the IRC debate but before voting closes.
> > >
> > > No! We have a campaigning period for a reason. What you suggest implies
> > > campaigning during the voting period, which is against the spirit, if
> > > not the letter, of the procedure.
> > 
> > When I've objected, I've been reminded that there is no rule against
> > campaigning during the whole election.  It is "only" a convention and
> > not one that's totally respected.  If you want to stop that, amend the
> > process to forbid it.  I'd second it.
> I didn't suggest to forbid campaigning outside the campaigning period.
> There's no need; a convention *is* proper for this kind of thing. The
> fact that it is not totally respected is, IMO, not a problem, since it
> usually is. The only cases that I've seen where campaigning occurred
> outside the campaigning period were either cases where something was
> interpreted as campaigning while it wasn't intended as such, or a reply
> to a question that was asked during the last few hours or minutes of the
> campaigning period. Those are minor things, and they shouldn't be a
> problem.

It's been just over a month since I sent this mail, the last in the
discussion; I think we can safely conclude that discussion on this
subject is over.

Can we have a vote?

<Lo-lan-do> Home is where you have to wash the dishes.
  -- #debian-devel, Freenode, 2004-09-22

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: