On Mon, Jan 23, 2006 at 12:40:30PM -0500, Anthony DeRobertis wrote: > On Sun, Jan 22, 2006 at 03:42:39PM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > > And what? If someone tries to bring through a GR stating that
> > > MS office warez can be distributed in main since it meets the DFSG,
> > > one might rule that as frivolous and a waste of time.
> > I'm not convinced the constitution gives the secretary the power to make
> > such a ruling. There are no provisions in the constitution for the Project
> > Secretary to dismiss a GR -- *even* a GR stating that the Debian Project
> > holds the value of pi to be 3 -- so long as the GR has the requisite number
> > of seconds.
> I suspect the Secretary could effectively do so by declining to take the
> vote under Section 2.1.1 ("[n]othing in this constitution imposes an
> obligation on anyone to do work for the Project.") It seems then that
> the secretary has no obligation to actually perform 4.2.3 or 7.1.1.
Which would be grounds for removing the secretary from office, if necessary
by appealing to the SPI board under 7.2. of the constitution.
> > In the present case, I understand that the proposed ballot option is
> > ambiguous wrt whether it constitutes an implicit amendment to the foundation
> > docs, and that in the absence of clarification (in the form of a re-worded
> > proposal) on the part of the proposer, it is the project secretary's
> > prerogative to specify a supermajority requirement.
> I think that under 7.1.3, it'd be the Secretary's job/power to determine
> supermajority requirement regardless of what the proposed ballot option
> says.
Correct, it is the secretary's job to determine supermajority requirement in
all cases. It would also be an abuse of power to establish a supermajority
requirement other than that specified by the constitution.
--
Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.debian.org/
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
