InQuiero - Sistema de Soporte Online - Atención

Title: InQuiero.com   Inquiero.com / Solución de atención al usuario sin instalación para CONTROL REMOTO    Control remoto seguro, rápido y fácil Incluye VoIP, transferencia de archivos y chat     Estimado ,  Con el fin de poder tener la opo

Number of candidates/re-election (was: Re: questions for all candidates)

Hrm, platforms seem to be up (mostly), so I guess that makes it "answer questions" time. On Mon, Feb 27, 2006 at 02:01:58AM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote: > 1. The past two years have seen higher numbers of candidates standing for DPL >than in the past. [...] what do you think about having seven

Delegations (was: Re: question for all candidates)

On Mon, Feb 27, 2006 at 12:18:55PM +0100, Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt wrote: > Should we amend our constitution to reflect how Debian is structured in > reality, or should the people doing these tasks now be recognized as > delegates of the DPL? What will you do to clarify the situation? There are two

http://www.debian.org/vote/2006/vote_001 -- misleading statement

Hi Debian Secretary and Leader, At , it lists the text of the amendments. However, for Choice 3 there is a paragraph at the end that is not part of the amendment, but is placed and formated such that it appears to be. I think this is very inappropriate

Re: First call for votes for the GFDL position statement

[On 2/27/06, Anton Zinoviev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Since the way these choices are proposed to you is misleading, I have > to sent this specifying message to you all. Without passing judgement, I'll note that a statement like this demands well stated proof. [...eliding background material..

Re: First call for votes for the GFDL position statement

This one time, at band camp, Helen Faulkner said: > Anton Zinoviev wrote: > > [...] > > > The Project Secretary is the author of the text that was used as a > > basis for the proposal in Choice 1. Of course as a sympathiser of a > > position somewhat opposite to my position it comes natural to h

Re: First call for votes for the GFDL position statement

Anton Zinoviev wrote: [...] > The Project Secretary is the author of the text that was used as a > basis for the proposal in Choice 1. Of course as a sympathiser of a > position somewhat opposite to my position it comes natural to him to > try to oppose my proposal[2]. Nevertheless during the d

Re: First call for votes for the GFDL position statement

On Sat, Feb 25, 2006 at 05:21:00PM -0600, Debian Project Secretary wrote: > > - - -=-=-=-=-=- Don't Delete Anything Between These Lines =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- > 25a628e9-d88e-40b7-8e1c-888cff421ea5 > [ ] Choice 1: GFDL-licensed works are unsuitable for main in all cases > [ ] Choice 2: GFDL-licensed

Re: Nomination

Mario Lang writes ("Re: Nomination"): > Marc Haber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > On Sun, Feb 26, 2006 at 12:02:11AM +0100, Joerg Jaspert wrote: > > > [something] > > > > I find that response utterly inappropriate. It would be inappropriate > > even during the campaign. > > I guess we are reachin

Re: question for all candidates

Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt writes ("question for all candidates"): > So, to the question: > Should we amend our constitution to reflect how Debian is structured in > reality, or should the people doing these tasks now be recognized as > delegates of the DPL? What will you do to clarify the situation?

Re: Nomination

Marc Haber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Sun, Feb 26, 2006 at 12:02:11AM +0100, Joerg Jaspert wrote: >> On 10576 March 1977, Ted Walther wrote: >> > I nominate myself for DPL in this 2006 election. >> >> You havent learned from the worst-result of a DPL candidate ever? >> Even "None of the abo

Re: Appeal to candidate questioners

Am Montag, 27. Februar 2006 12:25 schrieb MJ Ray: > Last year, we had very helpful debate summaries posted by > David Schmitt(?) which helped solve this confusion, but I don't > know whether anyone will prepare similar ones this year. I hear you :) Since last years summaries where quite work inte

Re: First call for votes for the GFDL position statement

On Mon, Feb 27, 2006 at 01:42:51PM +0100, Enrico Zini wrote: > > - - -=-=-=-=-=- Don't Delete Anything Between These Lines =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- > > - - -=-=-=-=-=- Don't Delete Anything Between These Lines =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Ops, mistake. Which in a way was good because I noticed a mistake in my choice

Re: First call for votes for the GFDL position statement

On Sat, Feb 25, 2006 at 05:21:00PM -0600, Debian Project Secretary wrote: > - - -=-=-=-=-=- Don't Delete Anything Between These Lines =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- > 25a628e9-d88e-40b7-8e1c-888cff421ea5 > [ 1 ] Choice 1: GFDL-licensed works are unsuitable for main in all cases > [ 2 ] Choice 2: GFDL-licensed w

Appeal to candidate questioners

Please, if you email questions of the candidates, put something in the subject line to indicate the subject(s) of the questions. It will make it much easier to find them in the archives. Last year, we had very helpful debate summaries posted by David Schmitt(?) which helped solve this confusion, b

Re: Nomination

Kevin Rosenberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > What's specifically is inappropriate about publically stating one's > opinion of a candidate, whether positive or negative, after being > nominated for the position? IMO it was inappropriate because it was mostly a personal attack and said nothing about why to

question for all candidates

Heya, Two years ago, Branden Robinson talked about the issue of some tasks in the project that are neither delegated by the Project leader nor covered by the Constitution directly. [1] He referenced his platform from 2004 last year (when he was elected), but it seems that nothing has happened sinc

questions for all candidates

The campaign period is open according to , so here are two questions for all of the candidates. 1. The past two years have seen higher numbers of candidates standing for DPL than in the past. While our voting system has no problem scaling to seven c