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

Re: Call for seconds: Revised ballot

On Mon, Oct 27 2008, MJ Ray wrote:

> Debian Project Secretary <secretary@debian.org> wrote:
>>         This is an interesting point. It all depends on the definition
>>  of what a resolution is, and whether a resolution can have multiple
>>  options, or not. I consider a resolution to be a formal expression of
>>  the opinion or will of an official body or a public assembly, adopted
>>  by vote. See "§A.1 Proposal" and "§A.1 Discussion and Amendment".
> [...]
>>         While I am tentatively ruling this so, I am still open to
>>  feedback, and I would appreciate hearing from anyone who thinks my
>>  determination on this issue is at fault, in which case we shall discuss
>>  this further.
> Please would you regard each option as a resolution and allow people
> to second all of them, or some subset of them if they wish?

        Sure. The constitution says that proposals must be seconded
 separately, but not that oe may not bundle multiple proposals in the
 same email. So, we can take the mail that Robert sent, and either
 second all proposals, or a subset, and the proposer would need to track
 the seconds for each proposal.

> On a related point, I've been disappointed for a while that amendments
> are used to replace (rather than amend) proposals.  I believe
> requiring people to pick X or Y or Z (instead of X + Y - Z) makes it
> much harder to develop a consensus.  Would any DDs be willing to
> support a GR that requires amendments to keep a non-trivial part of
> the proposal? Otherwise, it should be a new alternative resolution.

        You can propose an amendment that says  X + Y - Z, and have it
 on the ballot.  No constitutional amendment needed.

Grabel's Law: 2 is not equal to 3 -- not even for large values of 2.
Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@debian.org> <http://www.debian.org/~srivasta/>  
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B  924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C

Reply to: