Re: Draft GR for resolution process changes
Russ Allbery <rra@debian.org> writes:
> This paragraph helped me realize that you see my proposal as a
> substantive change over the current rules for the original GR proposer.
> I hadn't entirely realized that it was, and I see that I missed some
> subtlety in current rules, so I went back and reviewed them. I believe
> the implications of the current constitution (which I think was also in
> effect in 2008) are:
> 1. The original proposer of the GR can only change the text themselves if
> all the sponsors agree (A.1.5)
Oh, wait, no, it's even more complicated than that, because I think A.1.5
only applies to the *amendments* and not to the original text. So I think
you need K+1 people to make any change to the original GR text (other than
A.1.6 minor changes), but the proposer can make changes to the
*amendments* provided that all sponsors agree.
Each time I think I understand the current constitutional rules, I realize
that I missed something.
(I think the rest of the analysis still holds, although my change is more
complicated than making point 1 apply to all ballot options.)
--
Russ Allbery (rra@debian.org) <https://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
Reply to: