Re: Procedural rangling

[Kurt Roeckx <kurt@roeckx.be>]

On Thu, Nov 21, 2019 at 02:53:51PM +0100, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 21, 2019 at 08:43:06AM -0500, Sam Hartman wrote:
> > 
> > >>>>> "Kurt" == Kurt Roeckx <kurt@roeckx.be> writes:
> > 
> > 
> >     Kurt> I always struggle with trying to understand that part, but my
> >     Kurt> current interpretation is different. The page shows the
> >     Kurt> discussion perriod starting at the 19th, which is when Ian's
> >     Kurt> proposal got enough sponsors.
> > 
> > My understanding is that you believe any formal amendment achieving
> > sufficient sponsors restarts the discussion period.
> > You may also believe that a sponsor of a formal amendment accepting a
> > change to that amendment resets the discussion period.
> > I argue below that is inconsistent with the constitution and introduces
> > significant strategic problems.
> 
> I already changed my mind. Like I said, I always struggle with it.
> 
> I'll try write something down of all the things I get confused
> about later.

There are various terms used, and they don't always seems to be
used in a consistent way. Here are the terms that I think are
relevant:
- resolution
- formal resolution draft
- draft resolution
- original resolution
- amendment
- proposal
- formal amendment
- accepting a formal amendment
- proposer of a resolution
- proposer of a formal amendment
- original proposer of an amendment
- proposer of the original resolution

Let's start with:
  A.3. Voting procedure

    1. Each resolution and its related amendments is voted on in a single
       ballot that includes an option for the original resolution, each
       amendment, and the default option (where applicable).

So there seems to be only 1 resolution on the ballot, which I guess is the
first option (which you've considered dropping), all the rest is
called an amendment. This makes me assume that the difference between
the resolution and the original resolution is that the text has been updated.

But then there is:
    1. Following the proposal, the resolution may be discussed. Amendments
       may be made formal by being proposed and sponsored according to the
       requirements for a new resolution, or directly by the proposer of
       the original resolution.

It seems there is a difference between the "proposer of the
resolution" and the "proposer of the original resolution". So
maybe resolution doesn't mean what we think it does, and we can
have multiple resolutions on the ballot?

It also introduces the concept of a formal amendment. It seems
that a formal amendment is one that's on the ballot, and either 
has enough sponsors, or the proposer of the original resolution
can just say it's a good option to have on the ballot, and can
just add any other option, without requiring anybody to sponsor
it.

Then there is:
    2. A formal amendment may be accepted by the resolution's proposer, in
       which case the formal resolution draft is immediately changed to
       match.

It seems that to update the resolution, it first needs to be made a formal
amendment, and then the resolution's proposer can accept it. But the proposer
of the original resolution can just make any amendment formal (1), and
then accept it (2).

Which brings us to:
    5. The proposer of a resolution may suggest changes to the wordings of
       amendments; these take effect if the proposer of the amendment
       agrees and none of the sponsors object. In this case the changed
       amendments will be voted on instead of the originals.
    6. The proposer of a resolution may make changes to correct minor
       errors (for example, typographical errors or inconsistencies) or
       changes which do not alter the meaning, providing noone objects
       within 24 hours. In this case the minimum discussion period is not
       restarted.

It seems that once an amendments is formal, only the proposer of
the resolution can suggest changes. Can we make amendments to the
formal amendments?

Anyway, the reason this discussion was started was:
    4. The minimum discussion period is counted from the time the last
       formal amendment was accepted, or since the whole resolution was
       proposed if no amendments have been proposed and accepted.

This all seems to depend on what "formal amendment was accepted"
means. I think it means that A.1.2 was used:
    2. A formal amendment may be accepted by the resolution's proposer, in
       which case the formal resolution draft is immediately changed to
       match.

Which gets us back to what a formal resolution draft means, and I
have to wonder what the word draft there means.


Kurt