Re: Proposal to overturn init systems premature GR
On Tue, Dec 03, 2019 at 04:46:12PM +0000, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Kurt Roeckx writes ("Re: Proposal to overturn init systems premature GR"):
> > On Tue, Dec 03, 2019 at 04:15:02PM +0000, Ian Jackson wrote:
> > > I hereby propose the following General Resolution:
> > >
> > > Title: A few extra days for init systems GR text drafting
> > >
> > > 1. We exercise the DPL's power to set the minimum discussion
> > > period for the init systems GR to end at 23:59 UTC on
> > > Friday the 6th of December. (Constitution 4.1(3).)
> >
> > It would have been better that you did this before he called for
> > vote. There was clearly enough time to do this, and he's been
> > clear that he would do the CFV today.
>
> I had not appreciated that. It may have been buried in one of the
> mails.
>
> > > 5. All of the decisions in (2), (3) and (4) above, where applicable,
> > > are immediately put on hold (Constitution 4.2(2)(2) or 4.2(2)(3),
> > > as applicable.)
> > >
> > > 6. This entire GR proposal is withdrawn if the DPL:
> > > (i) withdraws the Call for Votes;
> > > (ii) adjusts the minimum discussion period according
> > > to our (1), above; and
> > > (ii) commits to not reducing it again and/or calling
> > > for a vote without giving 24 hours' notice.
> > >
> > > I think this is effective if I get 5 or 10 seconders, depending on the
> > > Secretary's interpretation of the Constitution.
> >
> > 5) asks the DPL's decision to be put on hold, so that part would
> > require 2K. But I think it's too late for that.
>
> Are you saying my proposal is ineffective even if I get 2K
> seconds ?
Currently, I think it is. But I'm still open to let people
convince me otherwise. So the options I currently see is:
- That someone convices me that you can still overturn his decision
to change the discussion period after he called for vote. In
theory he could change the discussion period and call for vote at
the same time, and in that case I would clearly allow it, but
I'm not sure where the line is between allowing it and not.
- That someone convices that amendements that received enough
sponsors reset reset the discussion period.
> I would like to point out that I asked you for advice about this on
> the 20th of November. Specifically, I asked
> Supposing Sam calls for a vote, can I stop him ?
> and then wrote
> I think maybe I can do this:
> and then gave a summary of roughly what my (4) and (5) do.
> You didn't reply.
I'm sorry, I missed that mail.
Kurt
Reply to: