Dear all, since it is rare that a GR is rejected by a majority of persons ranking "Further discussion" above all, I do not think that there is a need to make it more difficult to propose a GR. Nevertheless, in light of the painful firmware GR this year, I think that the following ideas can help to avoid such a situation to happen again.
- Restrict the use of 3:1 supermajority to GRs proposing changes of our fundation documents. - Authorise the proposer of a GR to call for a vote on a subset of the amendments. - Authorise the Secretary to use non-email methods, as email voting seems to be is a repeated source of problems. Programs like Selectricity look like interesting alternative (http://selectricity.org/). - Ask the GR proposer to take part of the work load, for instance by gathering and counting the PGP-signed secondings and writing the vote.debian.org page. If despite this the Project would require ~15 seconders per GR and amendments, I suggest to think about a new place and/or method to handle the formal PGP-signed emails of the GR preparation procedure, otherwise debian-vote can really become unreadable. Have a nice day, -- Charles Plessy Tsurumi, Kanagawa, Japan -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
