Re: Last minute cominbations G+D and/or G+E [and 1 more messages]
Kurt Roeckx writes ("Re: Last minute cominbations G+D and/or G+E"):
> If there is a consensus that new options can still be added, I
> will consider adding them. As long as I don't sent out the call
> for votes, things can be changed. But it currently seems unlikely to
> me, so I'm proceeding in the normal process.
Sam Hartman writes ("Re: Last minute cominbations G+D and/or G+E"):
> So, if there are people who are willing to step in and do the work to
> conduct this discussion in a respectful manner, and if the secretary's
> work is not unnecessarily slowed, then I would not object to ballot
> additions.
>
> I'm not withdrawing my CFV. I will push back strongly on discussion
> that is not respectful. I believe it is far more important we start
> voting this weekend than that we have additional revisions to the
> ballot. But if a new option were to emerge through respectful
> discussion, and the secretary were to be okay with it appearing on a
> ballot that went to vote this weekend, I'd also be fine with that.
I think my latest proposal G+D now has enough support to make it onto
the ballot, if its addition is not blocked by Sam's CFV.
Kurt, do you think there are procedural steps that Sam could take or
could have taken, which would enable it to be on the ballot, and still
start the vote this weekend ? If so, are you able to interpret Sam's
mail as taking those steps ?
Ian.
--
Ian Jackson <ijackson@chiark.greenend.org.uk> These opinions are my own.
If I emailed you from an address @fyvzl.net or @evade.org.uk, that is
a private address which bypasses my fierce spamfilter.
Reply to: