Re: Proposal to overturn init systems premature GR

[Kurt Roeckx <kurt@roeckx.be>]

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.

>  2. The DPL's decision to call for a vote on the init systems GR
>     is overturned.  (Constitution 4.1(3).)

It's not because he happens to be DPL, that I think this clause
should apply to the CFV.

>  3. Additionally, if the DPL's decision to call for a vote is enabled
>     by a decision by the DPL to vary the minimum discussion period:
>     the DPL's decision to vary the minimum discussion period is
>     overturned.

It would have been better that you did this before the CFV.

>  4. If the decision to call for a vote cannot be overturned via
>     Constitution 4.1(3), the DPL's decision(s) to propose all the
>     DPL's options on the ballot(s) is overturned.  We believe the
>     effect of this is to either stop the process so that it must be
>     restarted, or to drop the DPL's options from the ballot so that
>     the DPL no longer has standing to call for a vote.  (We would
>     prefer the latter, if we can't have what we want in (1) and (2),
>     above.)

If you're not happy with the result of the GR, you can have a
whole new GR.

>  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 This entire GR proposal is withdrawn if the DPL: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.


Kurt