Re: Constitution - formal proposal (v0.6.1)
I think we should make it someone's job to collate versions and amendments c, so that the secretary doesn't have to do it unless they want to. So, I'm considering inserting after A.2 `Calling for a vote' 2.: 3. The person who calls for a vote states what they believe the wordings of the resolution and any relevant amendments are, and consequently what form the ballot should take. However, the final decision on the form of ballot(s) is the Secretary's - see 7.1(1), 7.1(3) and A.3(6). This puts the onus on the people proposing resolutions and amendments to sort out the tedious details. Ian. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Constitution - formal proposal (v0.6.1)
Please see http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~ian/debian-organisation-0.6.1.html http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~ian/debian-organisation.html for the latest draft constitution. These changes are not yet formal. Changes (numbering as in new): s.1: List of decisionmakers rearranged and sentence added to help convey partial authority graph. s.6.3(2): Tech ctte members can't vote on whether to overrule themselves as a developer (unless they're the chairman, in which case they get only a casting vote as usual). s.9: Changes mainly suggested by Oliver Elphick to avoid perception of tax liability, c. s.A.1(5): Proposer of resolution may suggest changes to wordings of amendments, which the proposer of the amendment must accept and the seconders of the amendment may reject. s.A.4: Section on withdrawing clarified. s.A.4,5,6: renumbered (there were two s.A.3's). Ian. (Please honour the `Reply-To: debian-devel' header.) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
