Re: [Amendment] Reaffirm current requirements for GR sponsoring
> I know it has been seconded by 5 other DDs already.
Fun! Maybe we should just dispense with the voting and just let the highest
number of seconds win ?
/me also watches Kurt scrambling to keep up with the amendmends, seconds
and rescinds and would like to note that he seems to be doing an excellent
job, but worries that he might run out of steam a bit at some point :-)
 That in itself is IMO an argument against requiring too many seconds,
aside from the fact that it tends to reduce the readability of the actual
discussion, especially when it is read from the archives later by people
not following it as it happens.
Getting seconds is not a vote. It's a low-level check that there is
minimum support for an opinion.
It might be a good idea to implement a different mechanism (more like the
way the vote itself is done) to gather seconds. One that automatically
ignores any superfluous seconds after the required number has been reached.
That would make for a cleaner separation between discussion and seconding.
It would require the secretary to accept a proposed amendmend and "open"
it for seconding by assigning an identifier. That would also allow for
a basic quality check before seconds are received.
mail -s "Second: GR X amendmend Y" firstname.lastname@example.org
With confirmation mail (including longer description) and option to
retract of course.