Re: First call for votes for the Lenny release GR
Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 16 2008, Matthew Woodcraft wrote:
>> Russ Allbery <email@example.com> wrote:
>>> If there were something in the constitution detailing decision-making
>>> process around foundation documents and their interpretation, it would
>>> have made this whole conflict easier to resolve. But so far as I can
>>> tell, there isn't, apart from application to voting specifically.
>> There isn't anything in the constitution about the application of
>> foundation documents to voting either, other than the rule about
>> superseding them.
>> If the proposer of vote/2003/vote_0003 had intended it to give the
>> Secretary power to impose supermajority requirements on the grounds
>> that an option conflicts with a foundation document, one would have
>> expected him to have said so explicitly.
> So, in your opinion, which decision making entity is empowered
> by the constitution to make decisions about super majority
> requirements? What are the constraints on their ability to decide on
> this? What should they be looking at, apart from the constitution, to
> decide whether a super majority rule should apply?
I would think the explicit overriding or removal of parts of foundation
documents aka changing them as I read it in the constitution (but
apparently my interpretation differs from yours).