On 04/12/08 at 09:44 +0900, Charles Plessy wrote: > Le Thu, Dec 04, 2008 at 12:05:39AM +0000, Neil McGovern a écrit : > > > > > Also, you removed "and all the contributors" in Choice2 of the ballot > > > (Choice 1 > > > of the GR), which in my opinion is crucial. But since after the vote of > > > the GR, > > > the wording of the choices has no role in iterpreting the GR, just go > > > ahead if > > > you disagree. > > > > > > > I don't agree I'm afraid. > > I regret that you did not feedback when I made propositions for the ballot and > that you do not explain why you disagree. I think that your wording is > detrimental to the choice that is the least embarassing for Jörg (or second > least, after "further discussion"), but I accept your decision and will not > discuss further unless invited to do so.
Bah, the wording of this choice is so convoluted in the GR that it's impossible to summarize it in a few words in the ballot, so I'm fine with what Neil came up with. For example, I would have liked to see "Thank the DAM, invite the DAM to further discuss until vote or concensus, leading to a new proposal.". The fact that the proposal explicitely "thanks the DAM" was a reason for which several DDs said that they wouldn't vote it above FD. -- | Lucas Nussbaum | [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.lucas-nussbaum.net/ | | jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] GPG: 1024D/023B3F4F | -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
