Amendment: automatic expiry-on-failure, to Proposal: Enhance requirements for General resolutions
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Joerg Jaspert <joerg@debian.org> wrote:
> While one could go and define another arbitary number, like 10 or 15 or
> whatever, I propose to move this to something that is dependent on the
> actual number of Developers, as defined by the secretary, and to
> increase its value from the current 5 to something higher. [...]
Given that I feel the project's way of removing MIA developers is a
bit random, a bit opaque and not an explicit part of the NM agreement,
I think anything dependent on the actual number of Developers risks
paralysing the democratic processes. Debian Membership should
probably be addressed before increasing the GR requirements.
> Various IRC discussions and the discussion on debian-project in December
> told me that others feel similar. So here is a proposal.
Further, the discussion on debian-project in December asked for data
http://lists.debian.org/debian-project/2008/12/msg00197.html
and there's little available data to support the options in this GR.
I think it's improper that the proposal did not link the discussion.
Because there's little available data, I'm open to experimenting with
this, but I think we need a safeguard to avoid paralysis. I think a
so-called "sunset" expiry is a good idea.
AMENDMENT START
========================================================================
Replace "too small" with "thought to be too small, but there is a
lack of evidence about the correct level".
Replace clause c with "c) if general resolutions are proposed but none
receives the required number of seconds in a year, this resolution
expires and the required number of seconds returns to K."
========================================================================
AMENDMENT END
This amendment may be combined with any of the proposal in
Message-id: <[🔎] 87vdq3gcf6.fsf@vorlon.ganneff.de>
or the amendments in
Message-id: <[🔎] 87r60rgcdd.fsf@vorlon.ganneff.de>
Message-id: <[🔎] 20090322131519.GH4554@halon.org.uk>
and I invite their supporters to accept this amendment.
Otherwise, I ask for seconds for all three combinations.
I suggest that their ballot lines be the same as for the proposal or
amended proposals with "with expiry clause" appended.
Hope that helps,
- --
MJR/slef
My Opinion Only: see http://people.debian.org/~mjr/
Please follow http://www.uk.debian.org/MailingLists/#codeofconduct
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFJx4JYmUY5euFC5vQRAkCtAJ9NHeYDTo9iK1naFzCWkgzvCHgqowCfc+r2
UL7jAjNUDckNaQhbeXcK19w=
=L7mO
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply to: