Peter Samuelson <pe...@p12n.org> writes: > [Matthew Vernon] > > I would like to propose, therefore, the requirement that anyone > > proposing a GR be required to provide a short (no more than, say, 500 > > words) summary of why they believe the GR to be necessary. A similar > > requirement would apply to those proposing an amendment. > > If the rationale is a required part of a GR, should it be treated as > normative or informative? In other words, if I agree with the text of > a GR, but disagree with its posted rationale, am I supposed to vote for > or against it?
Informative, I think. If you agree with the proposed motion, you should vote for it, even if you think the rationale is incorrect. Regards, Matthew -- "At least you know where you are with Microsoft." "True. I just wish I'd brought a paddle." http://www.debian.org -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/5bzkowss1k....@chiark.greenend.org.uk
