Re: [Amendment] Reaffirm current requirements for GR sponsoring
Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 26, 2009 at 02:12:17AM +0100, Frans Pop wrote:
>> Getting seconds is not a vote. It's a low-level check that there is
>> minimum support for an opinion.
> It's also the most reliable way for a developer to issue a statement of
> support that will be seen by voters prior to the vote. Many voters
> don't follow debian-vote and won't follow the pro/con discussions in
> detail, but the debian-devel-announce mail links to the vote.d.o webpage
> that lists all the seconds right next to the amendment text.
Are you promoting the practice of voting by "I haven't got a clue what
this vote is about, but my friend X is supporting option C so I'll vote
for that" here? I know it happens, but I'd prefer to make that harder
rather than facilitating it.
IMHO the only thing that's important is _that_ a proposal got sufficient
seconds, not _who_ seconded it. (Of course the secretary should be able
to show this, but that's covered.)
However, there are variations possible. For example:
- during the period before the vote opens: register all seconds, but only
publish whether or not the number required has been reached;
- when the vote is opened: list the complete list of seconders as now.
That would still help get cleaner discussion threads and reduces any
skewing of the vote by a group of DDs boosting a particular option by all
sending in their seconds at that point.
Personally I really do find otherwise empty seconds on the list
distracting. I'd much rather see people actually contributing to the
discussion by explaining their rationale and keep the seconds separate.