Re: General Resolution: Statement regarding Richard Stallman's readmission to the FSF board result
Felix Lechner <felix.lechner@lease-up.com> writes:
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, Apr 19, 2021 at 2:40 PM Pierre-Elliott Bécue <peb@debian.org> wrote:
>>
>> I don't understand how you semantically see 7 and 8 as comparable.
>
> Aside from Bdale's reason for ranking unwanted options below FD—which
> were motivated by the voting system—I do: GRs do not decide a matter
> with prejudice, even though the weight to bring them again may be
> substantial. Therefore, doing nothing is very similar to doing nothing
> but talking more.
While I see what you're saying, I think it is missing a very important
point, which is that the bulk of the voters apparently disagree.
FD came quite close to the bottom of the ranking, whereas not issuing a
statement came top -- if the voters as a group have distinguished
between these two options so significantly it seems quite odd to pretend
that they are equivalent.
The two things also send quite different messages in the result.
If the FSF have paid attention to this vote (which I'd hope they did)
they'll have seen that deciding not to issue a statement won by a single
vote. All other options that achieved majority were critical of the FSF.
I think they would have (rightly) interpreted FD winning as a completely
different result.
> As we all heal from this divisive issue, I furthermore find it
> meaningful that proponents of a shortened discussion, who were at
> times accused of pushing the resolution, were actually aligned with
> voters: By a narrow margin, people did not want to discuss the matter
> at all.
or (given how low down the order FD came) by a wide margin they didn't
want to talk about it any more -- either way, I agree with you on that.
Cheers, Phil.
--
|)| Philip Hands [+44 (0)20 8530 9560] HANDS.COM Ltd.
|-| http://www.hands.com/ http://ftp.uk.debian.org/
|(| Hugo-Klemm-Strasse 34, 21075 Hamburg, GERMANY
Reply to: