Re: Call for votes on «Statement regarding Richard Stallman's readmission to the FSF board»
Nicolas Dandrimont dijo [Fri, Apr 02, 2021 at 06:27:48PM +0200]:
> > (...)
> > [A] Call for the FSF board removal, as in rms-open-letter.github.io
> > (proposed by Steve Langasek, currently base proposal)
> >
> > [B] Call for Stallman's resignation from FSF all bodies
> > (proposed by Sruthi Chandran, currently proposal B)
> >
> > [C] Discurage collaboration with the FSF while Stallman is in a leading position
> > (proposed by Santiago Ruano Rincón, currently proposal C)
> >
> > [D] Call on the FSF to further its governance processes
> > (proposed by Jonathan Wiltshire, currently proposal D)
> >
> > [E] Debian will not issue a public statement on this issue
> > (proposed by Timo Weingärtner, currently proposal E)
> >
> > [F] Support Stallman's reinstatement, as in rms-support-letter.github.io
> > (proposed by Timo Weingärtner, currently proposal A)
> > (...)
>
> I would suggest moving proposal E to the top or to the bottom of the
> ballot, as one can argue that this "status quo" option doesn't
> really fit within the "condemn → support" axis you've proposed. I
> think I agree with how the other options are ordered.
Makes sense. OTOH, we usually take FD as "preserve status quo"; FD
usually appears (and should appear this time as well, sorry for not
capturing it in my ballot proposal) as the last option.
I understand, option E is not semantically identical to FD, but is
equivalent in the way that it means "do nothing project-wide, either
for or against".
Reply to: