Re: Bundled votes and the secretary
On Sun, Dec 14 2008, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Le samedi 13 décembre 2008 à 22:09 +0100, Robert Millan a écrit :
>> For the record, I think the Secretary's interpretation of the Constitution is
>> perfectly correct.
>
> Whether it is correct or not is irrelevant here. The Secretary is
> deciding this without justification, in an inconsistent way (similar
> options get a different treatment), and without any thought for
> following the constitution itself.
I think I can honestly reject every one of these statements.
Message-ID: <87vdunwp65.fsf@anzu.internal.golden-gryphon.com>
Message-ID: <87skq0y4i5.fsf@anzu.internal.golden-gryphon.com>
Message-ID: <871vxjy7cm.fsf@anzu.internal.golden-gryphon.com>
Message-ID: <87prl2xrla.fsf@anzu.internal.golden-gryphon.com>
Message-ID: <87wsf9veei.fsf@anzu.internal.golden-gryphon.com>
Message-ID: <87myg0zrwu.fsf@anzu.internal.golden-gryphon.com>
Message-ID: <87iqqozrrh.fsf@anzu.internal.golden-gryphon.com>
Message-ID: <87abc0zhin.fsf@anzu.internal.golden-gryphon.com>
Message-ID: <87fxlrwfkd.fsf@anzu.internal.golden-gryphon.com>
Message-ID: <87y6ziv0m6.fsf@anzu.internal.golden-gryphon.com>
Message-ID: <87ljviuzv8.fsf@anzu.internal.golden-gryphon.com>
> For example, the Secretary explained that option 6 permanently modifies
> the foundation documents, but it doesn’t specify how. If it does modify
> them, where are the modifications? If it doesn’t, why does it require
> 3:1 majority? If it is not acceptable as is, the Secretary should have
> *refused to conduct the vote on it* so that a workable proposal could
> have been issued. If this option wins, how will we manage the situation?
Message-ID: <87fxltk5yz.fsf@anzu.internal.golden-gryphon.com>
Message-ID: <87vdtq564m.fsf@anzu.internal.golden-gryphon.com>
>
> For the GFDL GR, this was even worse: the Secretary decided that “GFDL
> is free” required 3:1 while “GFDL without invariant sections is free”
> did not. The only reason is that he couldn’t stand the latter proposal
> and decided to make it impossible to pass. Note that I was strongly
> against that proposal – but even while agreeing with Manoj on the topic,
> I cannot approve such a manipulation of the vote.
You do not think that the former being incompatible with the
DFSG had something to do with the difference?
manoj
--
It's amazing how much "mature wisdom" resembles being too tired.
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: