Re: Call for votes for "GR: Re-affirm support to the Debian Project Leader"

[Eduard Bloch]

#include 
* Debian Project Secretary [Sat, Oct 07 2006, 06:53:35PM]:
> - - -=-=-=-=-=- Don't Delete Anything Between These Lines =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
> a65763d3-b1e2-4530-8ff8-aa5915274eb4
> [ 2  ] Choice 1: Re-affirm DPL, wish success to unofficial Dunc Tank
> [ 1  ] Choice 2: Re-affirm DPL, do not endorse nor support his other projects
> [ 3  ] Choice 3: Further discussion
> - - -=-=-=-=-=- Don't Delete Anything Between These Lines =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

-- 
 cat /dev/urandom > /dev/dsp
 zobel: das nennt sich "metal"
 oder "techno", je nachdem


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Director Appointee

[Leo Johnson]

Hello,

Would you like to make at least 1.5K to 3.5K daily just for returning
calls?
If you have a telephone and can return calls you are fully qualified.

Speak with us - 800-301-3784

Sincerely,
Leo Johnson



-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Asking for the ban of Frans Pop from debian-vote ...

[Kalle Kivimaa]

Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Then we sure can require that he asks a third party to read and forward his
> mails. Or he can show proper behaviour, and not take ad-hominem (even
> disguised ones) attacks against posters holding opinion he disaproves of.

For the record, if either the DPL or the listmasters do apply any
technical measures to prevent *any* DD (including both Sven and Frans)
from posting directly to -vote, I will immediately propose a GR to
hold and overrule that action. Fortunately, I think our current DPL
and listmasters are sane enough not to do this.

-- 
* Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology (T.P)  *
*   PGP public key available @ http://www.iki.fi/killer   *


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Call for votes for "GR: : Handling source-less firmware in the Linux kernel"

[Toni Mueller]

Hi,

On Sat, 07.10.2006 at 18:52:41 -0500, Debian Project Secretary <[EMAIL 
PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The details of the general resolution can be found at:
> http://www.debian.org/vote/vote_007

the correct link is probably

http://www.debian.org/vote/2006/vote_007

(note the '2006' part). I'd prefer to get correct links the first time
such an announcement is made. Thank you!

I didn't check any of the other GR announcements.


Best,
--Toni++



pgpv0iFfcwsTH.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: Call for votes for "GR: Recall the project leader"

[Lars Wirzenius]

On la, 2006-10-07 at 18:55 -0500, Debian Project Secretary wrote:
> - - -=-=-=-=-=- Don't Delete Anything Between These Lines =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
> 49a98df6-2bd4-40c8-a559-7e15212dbd26
> [ 2 ] Choice 1: Recall the project leader
> [ 1 ] Choice 2: Further discussion
> - - -=-=-=-=-=- Don't Delete Anything Between These Lines =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-



signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Re: [AMENDMENT]: Release Etch now, with source-less but legal and freely licensed firmware

[MJ Ray]

Frans Pop <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: [...]
> I still don't see what d-vote has to do with this. Distributability IMO is
> an issue that is the province of package maintainer and FTP masters.

Given a GR can reverse decisions of FTP masters about it, which is a sort
of negative instruction, I think it's fine (although maybe unnecessary)
to issue a position statement about the developer body wishes to tackle
it, a sort of positive expectation.

> If someone has evidence that some package or part of a package is not
> properly licenced, I see the following rough procedure:
> - file an RC bug asking for removal from the archive (note: not from main
>   to non-free, but total removal) of the offending material;
> - maintainer will judge the BR; if he agrees, takes action; if not, he
>   will probably consult with upstream (and maybe other distributions)
>   about the issue;

"Probably consult with upstream"?  Experience suggests that some
maintainers will probably close the bug with no further action if the
submitter cannot give a full rationale *and* show reasonable backing for
it.  Even worse, some will take it personally and abuse the submitter.

One motivation for a position statement GR is to show reluctant
maintainers a hopefully-clear rationale with reasonable support.
If anyone objects to that, then please help those who are trying to
retrain maintainers who close bugs badly, and that motivation will
diminish.

> - if upstream says there is no problem and can support that with legal
>   arguments, the BR should probably be closed;
> - if the submitter disagrees he can try asking for advice (d-legal, fsf)
>   and possibly appeal to TC.

That seems a bit warped.  The *maintainer* is told to ask debian-legal if
in doubt.  It shouldn't be left to submitters to consult d-l.

Why could the technical committee overrule on a non-technical problem
like copyright?  I think the appeal route would be to delegates like
ftpmasters first, and then maybe to the developers, hoping for an
delegate-overruling GR.  Sadly, this becomes ineffective if ftpmasters
are too overworked to answer mails promptly: it's a weakness in the
debian system that it can be hard to address non-decision.

I'm not surprised that appeal to TC is suggested: IIRC, technical and
policy decision processes have been confused under this DPL and it allows
some disputes to continue longer than they should, which is part of why
I support his recall.

> Compliance with licences is something based on facts, not votes. And this is
> the point that both Steve Langasek and Anthony Towns have made several
> times in this discussion.

Sadly, that point is incorrect.  It is based on both facts and votes.
The facts of what is written in the licence, but the votes of the
licensors and the courts about what it means.  Even the votes of
legislators have a role.

> To me it seems very strange that Debian should have a totally different take
> on this than other distros.

As I'm sure you know, it's different in other ways too.  This is not
an argument in itself.

> Only *after* having determined that the material is distributable do we need
> to decide whether or not it is suitable for main. This is where the DFSG
> comes in, where the opinion of the project counts and where you can solve
> differences of opinion or changes in policy by GR.

*We* cannot *determine* whether material is distributable.  That will
be determined by legal systems, should it get that far.  We can only
estimate, and then decide whether or not *we* distribute it.  Sometimes
our estimate will be pretty sure, as near as determined as one can get,
such as for common licences in main, yet not totally determined.

[...]
> > > I have two times proposed to postpone the detailed analysis of the
> > > firmware situation until after the release, and I still feel that that
> > > is where it belongs: not on the list, but with a (delegated) team of
> > > developers who have access to proper legal advice and can study the
> > > implementation issues surrounding it in relative quiet and can prepare
> > > a position statement (with alternatives) that can _then_ be voted on.
> >
> > On past experience, I have no confidence in this being done well in
> > secret. I note that we have agreed that we will not hide problems.  This
> > should be done in public as far as possible.
> 
> In endless flamewars that fail to reach any real result? Of course the
> delegates should work openly, but they should also be allowed to prepare
> their position statement in relative quiet before submitting it (probably
> in concept) for general discussion. And of course their reasoning needs to
> be documented and supported by evidence.

In the text of the proposal marked '> > >' above, the position statement
was going straight to the vote.  I welcome the change to allow general
discussion.  I suggest it would be a good idea for that discussion to
start before expensive (in time if not money) expert legal advice is
obtained.  We may

GPG key problem with new vote keys

[Toni Mueller]

Hello,

I'm using mutt and gpg 1.4.5, but have severe problems using the vote
keys.  First, I do something like 'Ctrl-K' to import the key. This
sometimes gives me a message like 'processed: 0, imported: 1'. When I
then try to use a key like "[EMAIL PROTECTED]", gpg tells me
that it doesn't find such a key. Any ideas about what that could be?
Other keys seem to work fine...


Best,
--Toni++


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Vote page locations on the recent call for votes

[Manoj Srivastava]

Hi,

The call for votes sent our recently had a URL for the full
 text that we missing a path segment -- namely, the year. So, the
 correct URL's would be:
 http://vote.debian.org/2006/vote_005
 http://vote.debian.org/2006/vote_006
 http://vote.debian.org/2006/vote_007

A visit to http://vote.debian.org/, or indeed, any pages of
 previous vote, show a navigation bar that highlights current votes;
 so this should not have been hard to find.

manoj
-- 
A newspaper is a circulating library with high blood pressure. Arthure
"Bugs" Baer
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
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]

Re: Call for votes for "GR: Re-affirm support to the Debian Project Leader"

[Manoj Srivastava]

On Mon, 9 Oct 2006 07:57:51 +0200, Matthias Urlichs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: 

> Hi, Thomas Bushnell BSG:
>> > Okay... now what the hell should happen if these ballots both
>> > succeed?
>> 
>> We would know that Debian developers are insane.  The ballots
>> cannot both succeed unless sufficient people vote to Re-affirm the
>> DPL *and* vote to recall him.

> That assertion holds only if everybody who votes does so on both
> ballots. Our quorum is less than 50 people -- thus, we could hold 20
> valid elections with entirely disjoint sets of participants, neither
> of whom would be insane by that metric.

> Doing those 20 elections would of course be somewhat insane, but the
> conceptual difference between 1 and 2 is larger than between 2 and
> 20.  IMHO.

> Yes I know: it's still rather unlikely fo the votes to get that
> result, but that's not my point.

If the level of apathy has reached these hights, we have more
 problems than just this inconsistent resolution.

manoj
 yes, I know apathy is the current fad
-- 
You can't go home again, unless you set $HOME.
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
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]

Re: Call for votes for "GR: : Handling source-less firmware in the Linux kernel"

[Manoj Srivastava]

Hi,

I note that the same typo was on every draft ballot posted
 here, and no one else caught the typos in the draft ballots either.

manoj
-- 
Scintillation is not always identification for an auric substance.
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
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]

Re: Call for votes for "GR: : Handling source-less firmware in the Linux kernel"

[Manoj Srivastava]

On Mon, 9 Oct 2006 10:40:16 +0200, Toni Mueller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: 

> Hi,

> On Sat, 07.10.2006 at 18:52:41 -0500, Debian Project Secretary <[EMAIL 
> PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> The details of the general resolution can be found at:
>> http://www.debian.org/vote/vote_007

> the correct link is probably

> http://www.debian.org/vote/2006/vote_007

> (note the '2006' part). I'd prefer to get correct links the first
> time such an announcement is made. Thank you!

And I would like world peace and an end to world hunger.

Typos happen. Deal with 'em. Anyone who can't get to the GR
 text on the vote.debian.org web page, the mailing list archives, or
 elsewhere probably should not be allowed to vote anyway.

manoj
-- 
He was so narrow-minded he could see through a keyhole with both eyes.
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
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]

Re: Call for votes for "GR: : Handling source-less firmware in the Linux kernel"

[Ben Pfaff]

Debian Project Secretary <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> In the brackets next to your preferred choice, place a 1. Place a 2 in
> the brackets next to your next choice.  Do not enter a number smaller
> than 1 or larger than 2.  You may skip numbers.  You may rank options
> equally (as long as all choices X you make fall in the range 1<= X <=
> 3).

These instructions are self-contradictory.
-- 
Ben Pfaff 
email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
web: http://benpfaff.org


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Question about GR-2006-004

[Francesco Poli]

On Sun, 8 Oct 2006 13:03:33 -0700 Don Armstrong wrote:

> On Sun, 08 Oct 2006, Francesco Poli wrote:
> > On Sat, 7 Oct 2006 23:04:21 -0700 Don Armstrong wrote:
> > > Thus, the proposal very carefully walks the line that the DFSG
> > > currently walks. Whether the DFSG should apply to all works (or
> > > just some work) is an open question, and one that I believe should
> > > be discussed at length.
> > 
> > I'm not very happy that the GR reaffirms this interpretation of the
> > scope of DFSG#2. I think that maybe it would be much more useful if
> > the issue of sourceless non-programmatic works were kept out of
> > GR-2006-004 (that is to say, if the text of the GR didn't have item
> > B.).
> 
> This part of the GR merely restates what is current practice,
[...]
> Sure; the DFSG is unfortunatly worded rather inelegantly in those
> cases. It was long intended to also amend the DFSG after 2004_003 to
> resolve these unfortunate ambiguities, but the outfall from that
> decision (and the subsequent retirement of the drafter) have basically
> shelved those changes. The GR as drafted is limited only to the
> interpretation of section 2 (ignoring point D, which is disparate) so
> any effect upon other sections is purely in the mind of the reader.

OK, but reaffirming the literal meaning of DFSG#2 now does not help a
future discussion where the DFSG will hopefully be changed to
unambiguously affect all works (both programmatic and non-programmatic).

That is to say, this GR seems to address two separate issues at once.
With the possible consequence of having people that would vote for the
text, as far as one issue is concerned, but against the same text for
the other issue...  :-(
Luckily IANADD, otherwise I would *not* know how to vote for this GR...

> 
> > P.S.: Please go on Cc:ing me, as I am not a subscriber. Thanks.
> 
> It would make my life easier if you would preserve the
> Mail-Followup-To: then.

OK, I'm trying to set it appropriately, but that makes unfortunately
*my* life harder, because the MUA I'm using (Sylpheed) does *not*
support the Mail-Followup-To: field and I have to set it *manually*... 
:-(


-- 
But it is also tradition that times *must* and always
do change, my friend.   -- from _Coming to America_
. Francesco Poli .
 GnuPG key fpr == C979 F34B 27CE 5CD8 DC12  31B5 78F4 279B DD6D FCF4


pgpsmiEXlLbg4.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: Call for votes for "GR: : Handling source-less firmware in the Linux kernel"

[Frank Küster]

Ben Pfaff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Debian Project Secretary <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> In the brackets next to your preferred choice, place a 1. Place a 2 in
>> the brackets next to your next choice.  Do not enter a number smaller
>> than 1 or larger than 2.  You may skip numbers.  You may rank options
>> equally (as long as all choices X you make fall in the range 1<= X <=
>> 3).
>
> These instructions are self-contradictory.

Come on, don't you guys have nothing more interesting to do than bashing
our secretary?  Not?  Okay, then please, as an entertaining exercise,
find out where this text is from, how it comes that it is
self-contradictory, and provide a fix for the script that does that.

Regards, Frank

-- 
Dr. Frank Küster
Single Molecule Spectroscopy, Protein Folding @ Inst. f. Biochemie, Univ. Zürich
Debian Developer (teTeX/TeXLive)

Re: Call for votes for "GR: : Handling source-less firmware in the Linux kernel"

[Manoj Srivastava]

On Mon, 09 Oct 2006 08:43:57 -0700, Ben Pfaff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: 

> Debian Project Secretary <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> In the brackets next to your preferred choice, place a 1. Place a 2
>> in the brackets next to your next choice.  Do not enter a number
>> smaller than 1 or larger than 2.  You may skip numbers.  You may
>> rank options equally (as long as all choices X you make fall in the
>> range 1<= X <= 3).

> These instructions are self-contradictory.  -- Ben Pfaff email:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] web: http://benpfaff.org

Rubish. You have tow overlapping constraints. One constraint
 happens to be a superset of the other. There is not contradiction --
 get your nit-picking right, fer gaeds sake.

You can fully express all possible coices with just the
 numbers 1 and 2 for this vote, so the CFV isn't even wrong. I just
 overestimated the math and logic skillz of the voters.

manoj
-- 
[Crash programs] fail because they are based on the theory that, with
nine women pregnant, you can get a baby a month.  -- Wernher von Braun
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
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]

Re: Call for votes for "GR: Re-affirm support to the Debian Project Leader"

[Raul Miller]

On 10/7/06, Debian Project Secretary <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >
Voting period starts  00:00:01 UTC on Sunday,

Votes must be received by 23:59:59 UTC on Saturday,


Fortunately, vote.debian.org provides the associated dates.

--
Raul


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Call for votes for "GR: : Handling source-less firmware in the Linux kernel"

[Jurij Smakov]

On Mon, Oct 09, 2006 at 04:33:42PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> On Mon, 09 Oct 2006 08:43:57 -0700, Ben Pfaff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: 
> 
> > Debian Project Secretary <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >> In the brackets next to your preferred choice, place a 1. Place a 2
> >> in the brackets next to your next choice.  Do not enter a number
> >> smaller than 1 or larger than 2.  You may skip numbers.  You may
> >> rank options equally (as long as all choices X you make fall in the
> >> range 1<= X <= 3).
> 
> > These instructions are self-contradictory.  -- Ben Pfaff email:
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] web: http://benpfaff.org
> 
> Rubish. You have tow overlapping constraints. One constraint
>  happens to be a superset of the other. There is not contradiction --
>  get your nit-picking right, fer gaeds sake.

Whatever you call it, it's your screw-up. And yes, this is a concern, 
because there are plenty of people participating in this vote, who 
might be confused by this, but reluctant to ask for clarifications due 
to language and/or culture barrier. If it's so unbearably painful 
for you to hear the criticism, perhaps you should do a better job of 
proof-reading the ballot (and your replies :-) next time.

-- 
Jurij Smakov   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Key: http://www.wooyd.org/pgpkey/  KeyID: C99E03CC


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Call for votes for "GR: : Handling source-less firmware in the Linux kernel"

[Manoj Srivastava]

On Mon, 9 Oct 2006 19:54:00 -0700, Jurij Smakov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: 

> On Mon, Oct 09, 2006 at 04:33:42PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>> On Mon, 09 Oct 2006 08:43:57 -0700, Ben Pfaff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> said:
>> 
>> > Debian Project Secretary <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> >> In the brackets next to your preferred choice, place a 1. Place
>> >> a 2 in the brackets next to your next choice.  Do not enter a
>> >> number smaller than 1 or larger than 2.  You may skip numbers.
>> >> You may rank options equally (as long as all choices X you make
>> >> fall in the range 1<= X <= 3).
>> 
>> > These instructions are self-contradictory.  -- Ben Pfaff email:
>> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] web: http://benpfaff.org>
>> Rubish. You have tow overlapping constraints. One constraint
>> happens to be a superset of the other. There is not contradiction
>> -- get your nit-picking right, fer gaeds sake.

> Whatever you call it, it's your screw-up.

It was a mistake, true.  But the  restrictions are not in
 conflict -- they are just not identical. Any reasonable voter would
 know what to do.

> And yes, this is a concern, because there are plenty of people
> participating in this vote, who might be confused by this, but
> reluctant to ask for clarifications due to language and/or culture
> barrier.

If anyone is seriously confused by the discrepancy, they
  should not be voting in the first place.

> If it's so unbearably painful for you to hear the criticism, perhaps
> you should do a better job of proof-reading the ballot (and your
> replies :-) next time.

Fuck that. It is far more instructive finding out those who
 are logically challenged and whose input should be ignored in the
 future. 

manoj
see, even people in official roles in debian can be equally facetious
as people who are smart-ass about pointing out errors
-- 
If the future isn't what it used to be, does that mean that the past
is subject to change in times to come?
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
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]

Re: Call for votes for "GR: Re-affirm support to the Debian Project Leader"

[Manoj Srivastava]

Hi,
On Mon, 9 Oct 2006 18:21:03 -0400, Raul Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: 

> On 10/7/06, Debian Project Secretary <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >
> Voting period starts 00:00:01 UTC on Sunday,
>> Votes must be received by 23:59:59 UTC on Saturday,

> Fortunately, vote.debian.org provides the associated dates.

AAaagh!

manoj

-- 
HEAD CRASH!!  FILES LOST!! Details at 11.
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
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]

Re: Question about GR-2006-004

[Don Armstrong]

On Mon, 09 Oct 2006, Francesco Poli wrote:
> OK, but reaffirming the literal meaning of DFSG#2 now does not help
> a future discussion where the DFSG will hopefully be changed to
> unambiguously affect all works (both programmatic and
> non-programmatic).

It doesn't help or hinder it; discussions about what changes to the
DFSG should be made or the nature of future discussions about those
changes are just totally out of its scope. (And in the latter case,
totally out of the scope of any GR.) [If it's too difficult to
separate considering what a text currently says versus considering
what one wishes it said, there's not much I can do to help.]


Don Armstrong

-- 
The sheer ponderousness of the panel's opinion ... refutes its thesis
far more convincingly than anything I might say. The panel's labored
effort to smother the Second Amendment by sheer body weight has all
the grace of a sumo wrestler trying to kill a rattlesnake by sitting
on it--and is just as likely to succeed.
 -- Alex Kozinski in Silveira V Lockyer

http://www.donarmstrong.com  http://rzlab.ucr.edu


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Call for votes for "GR: : Handling source-less firmware in the Linux kernel"

[Frank Küster]

Jurij Smakov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> On Mon, Oct 09, 2006 at 04:33:42PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>> On Mon, 09 Oct 2006 08:43:57 -0700, Ben Pfaff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: 
>> 
>> > Debian Project Secretary <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> >> In the brackets next to your preferred choice, place a 1. Place a 2
>> >> in the brackets next to your next choice.  Do not enter a number
>> >> smaller than 1 or larger than 2.  You may skip numbers.  You may
>> >> rank options equally (as long as all choices X you make fall in the
>> >> range 1<= X <= 3).
>> 
>> > These instructions are self-contradictory.  -- Ben Pfaff email:
>> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] web: http://benpfaff.org
>> 
>> Rubish. You have tow overlapping constraints. One constraint
>>  happens to be a superset of the other. There is not contradiction --
>>  get your nit-picking right, fer gaeds sake.
>
> Whatever you call it, it's your screw-up. 

I don't even think there's anything seriously screwed.  And if there
were, the right thing to do would be to ask Manoj "Please tell me where
I can download the script you use, so that I can fix it", instead of
blaming him.

> And yes, this is a concern, 
> because there are plenty of people participating in this vote, who 
> might be confused by this, but reluctant to ask for clarifications due 
> to language and/or culture barrier. 

Anyone who ist not able to figure out themselves what this means might
have a problem in their Debian work generally, since you can't expect
that everything is spelled out and proofread when you're dealing with
Debian packages.

Anyone who has a language and/or culture barrier to asking if they don't
understand something important, and/or at the same time is not able to
find the information in the constitution that is the "source" for this
paragraph, they will have a *severe* problem working in Debian.

> If it's so unbearably painful 
> for you to hear the criticism, perhaps you should do a better job of 
> proof-reading the ballot (and your replies :-) next time.

Given the (often unwarranted) criticism Manoj had to face in the last
couple of days, his reply wasn't really bad-tempered.  And how about
your offering him to proofread the ballot?  Or just doing it, since he
actually posted it in public for that very purpose?

Regards, Frank
-- 
Dr. Frank Küster
Single Molecule Spectroscopy, Protein Folding @ Inst. f. Biochemie, Univ. Zürich
Debian Developer (teTeX/TeXLive)