On Fri, 28 May 2004 13:11:21 -0400, Raul Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> On Fri, May 28, 2004 at 03:38:47PM +0100, Andrew Suffield wrote:
>> While we're on the subject of interpretations, the first clause
>> ("The Debian project resolves that it will not compromise on
>> freedom") constitutes a position statement about an issue of the
>> day, under 4.1.5. Anybody who tries to give it a stronger meaning
>> is invited to stop being a dick.
> That meaning is plenty strong as it is.
> "Position of the day statements can overrule foundation documents if
> they achieve a 3:1 majority" seems to be a valid interpetation of
> the constitution.
Only if the intent was so stated at the start of voting,
since the voters intent may be affected by whether they felt a
foundation document was being overruled.
I would not like to have foundation docs bein
serendipitously being overturned by a simple non 3:1 requiring GR.
manoj
--
When you're in command, command. Admiral Nimitz
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024R/C7261095 print CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
