General Resolution: Diversity statement results
Hi, The results of the General Resolution is that the diversity statement has been accepted. The details of the results shall soon be available at: http://vote.debian.org/2012/vote_002 In the mean time the results are also available at: http://master.debian.org/~secretary/diversity/results.txt http://master.debian.org/~secretary/diversity/results.png The tally sheet is at: http://master.debian.org/~secretary/diversity/tally.txt The list of people voting is at: http://master.debian.org/~secretary/diversity/voters.txt Kurt Roeckx Debian Project Secretary signature.asc Description: Digital signature
General Resolution: Diversity statement, first call for votes
Hi, This is the first call for votes for the General Resolution about a diversity statement. Voting period starts 00:00:00 UTC on Sunday, May 20th, 2012 Votes must be received by 23:59:59 UTC on Saturday, June 2nd, 2012 The following ballot is for voting on a diversity statement. This vote is being conducted as required by the Debian Constitution. You may see the constitution at http://www.debian.org/devel/constitution. For voting questions or problems contact secret...@debian.org. The details of the general resolution can be found at: http://www.debian.org/vote/2012/vote_002 Also, note that you can get a fresh ballot any time before the end of the vote by sending a signed mail to bal...@vote.debian.org with the subject diversity. HOW TO VOTE First, read the full text of the platform. To cast a vote, it is necessary to send this ballot filled out to a dedicated e-mail address, in a signed message, as described below. The dedicated email address this ballot should be sent to is: divers...@vote.debian.org The form you need to fill out is contained at the bottom of this message, marked with two lines containing the characters '-=-=-=-=-=-'. Do not erase anything between those lines, and do not change the choice names. There are 2 choices in the form, which you may rank with numbers between 1 and 2. In the brackets next to your preferred choice, place a 1. Place a 2 in the brackets next to your next choice. Continue until you reach your last choice. Do not enter a number smaller than 1 or larger than 2. You may skip numbers, leave some choices unranked, and rank options equally. Unranked choices are considered equally the least desired choices, and ranked below all ranked choices. To vote no, no matter what, rank Further Discussion as more desirable than the unacceptable choices, or you may rank the Further Discussion choice and leave choices you consider unacceptable blank. (Note: if the Further Discussion choice is unranked, then it is equal to all other unranked choices, if any -- no special consideration is given to the Further Discussion choice by the voting software). Finally, mail the filled out ballot to: divers...@vote.debian.org. Don't worry about spacing of the columns or any quote characters () that your reply inserts. NOTE: The vote must be GPG signed (or PGP signed) with your key that is in the Debian keyring. You may, if you wish, choose to send a signed, encrypted ballot: use the vote key appended below for encryption. The voting software (Devotee) accepts mail that either contains only an unmangled OpenPGP message (RFC 2440 compliant), or a PGP/MIME mail (RFC 3156 compliant). To avoid problems I suggest you use PGP/MIME. - - -=-=-=-=-=- Don't Delete Anything Between These Lines =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- 91ec7d6e-0296-4199-ad9e-3ed34ecd080a [ ] Choice 1: Ratify diversity statement [ ] Choice 2: Further Discussion - - -=-=-=-=-=- Don't Delete Anything Between These Lines =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- -- The responses to a valid vote shall be signed by the vote key created for this vote. The public key for the vote, signed by the Project secretary, is appended below. -BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK- Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux) mQENBE+4I/EBCACz6iKs3WdCZ3Q2dvXjL3ET0a4YxLKwDKQvcaHyjWT6mBM/rzvg f0zg5+m1PX1/X7ytwuprZ4ZjibOyqEULQn9FvRW9sgKA9O+e39HGfWNChZnJ0mSb bUDI2zEgWQBwfsRxmsQIM25MtSQdxmdtByklgCHMWYmberFZMax7mwwbYl/tQBct dli+ngzMFZzRhxAZzXHMJ4DvZ/bYW2EDAOWu4dN5liSIyqDwysbcGpv/YIYuNacv QwHxeUuJ2lW5fnzHkATs7Z3fRW+n9p6bYwJjhEkWiKld0t8GEQetQPbx2RaqXnPY 1QDzDPEMPGWXzvAX5Z5iXTWV8tyVIeWjX89nABEBAAG0L0RpdmVyc2l0eSBzdGF0 ZW1lbnQgPGRpdmVyc2l0eUB2b3RlLmRlYmlhbi5vcmc+iQE+BBMBAgAoBQJPuCPx AhsDBQkAGl4ABgsJCAcDAgYVCAIJCgsEFgIDAQIeAQIXgAAKCRABMBhh5D7tT5KA B/sF9NeNL1DuiQVwzSjQfcRI7tsEj00smMLdUjIEukv92ODRGZJVb2zbf2cucJ3h EpuADxd1RAKkgPeoimj0uD6pY2N98Ud4yL3mHD9jfVGpxfcnTCfoapDxpAMlHvif W2/DTnlnhLMP48YTyzGH5Y8pO9wjgarM6tt8wMxe2iu7rpLa7+Vps02javjFatxD 7SN3/ej+2G3Iqs4cMn8Hb0Ieq+1Hdkmsy34sFqqpQU9StcKT33uyUwXJiLTzIUCW 0L4vcgqfJn7+ymF/iKB9jKxDXd0m1ZwPyWh48fxnoUESjSnADV7bD1pjhUYkzN2/ WoShJZM5I8C0gTJYrOOU1Tl/iEYEExEKAAYFAk+4JOAACgkQQdwckHJElwsH7QCg 4TIN8KET9RcUf2B4rqN/x/a75RQAoM94263WSpmHAY25ey6noJCfYdVouQENBE+4 I/EBCACqu+sZLzXQZYq9cB1oNfCv8Uw8Awvq7AC+nsFcBMPcqD42XDo6TC5JER0x gWb1WnCD8u+t+THxoNa8CMxGOLnKrkWX2C/x8GLUPjINqXLStpdeQ8ovl7XIf8+1 bwZmBomz0kN+g80RLAhf0fkvdtnwX4gOvC+2Tsuw7iw/wtmUh2wj+ODQJa25XOtR wh4Ed9lv9NqPMgPDoJiyWZnd+C8ae6dvMzyi+BSZITLHpJPFqImAfarCILdyQxbJ DcOBAdyHItH/WoW3J+6j3nCzXdRUj0rRNEr9D8F99PWAgtKWbKc+iPEPSyggm7Vp VhoCgzWkxWlGxDC+rW9RYUGk1s5RABEBAAGJASUEGAECAA8FAk+4I/ECGwwFCQAa XgAACgkQATAYYeQ+7U+jRwf/YpRbueuupaWYQjpFZuKx6e0Oa3v7c33WfPrBLXwA WF6NoKfwlcMh2v96M6mJhcaXDeJ+Sng7gOwbFIO5J8/WIZk3MKsH3aELOLyz3f3V WSJU5PmxkrDEH5lG+/9vo9uZMTxL5f9Mdt949daxnr7JXrw/WnBp6C5KI0mXRWPu OGTNHqRHgC96K0zdWPT4qeADfkMCkUJ5KjMuOtigWV4xcRCJhi1RjZNHKdY8OF+I XkeQN9KEgVguDWbh/o0g2P0JDmNm8zLL2krX5O6EU1PX7NFHaej+ELBg1E1kZvEX
Re: General Resolution: Diversity statement
On Wed, May 09, 2012 at 07:21:10AM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote: Hi all, I hope that our constitution has the answer to that question. If a GR needed self-locking dispositions, that would go against the idea of having a constitution at all. My personal opinion is that for things that should not be changed apart with a GR, the Constitution offers the status of Foundation Document. So if the diversity statement is not a foundation document, I do not see what would forbid to change it after the GR. Note that a foundation document requires a 3:1 majority to change it, while a posistion statement only requires a simple majority. Kurt -- 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/20120509170534.ga23...@roeckx.be
Re: General Resolution: Diversity statement
* Stefano Zacchiroli z...@debian.org, 2012-05-09, 00:15: considering that the resolution procedure already takes into account make changes to correct minor errors (for example, typographical errors or inconsistencies) or changes which do not alter the meaning, providing noone objects within 24 hours, The purpose of A.1.6. is to facilitate polishing the GR text before the vote... I hope similar changes could be accepted on the website if they'll ever be spotted. ...because it's not acceptable to tamper with it later on. -- Jakub Wilk -- 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/20120509174252.ga5...@jwilk.net
Re: General Resolution: Diversity statement
* Debian Project Secretary - Kurt Roeckx secret...@debian.org, 2012-05-08, 23:28: http://www.debian.org/vote/2012/vote_002 Hmm. According to this page, the proposal[0] was seconded by Steve Langasek. However, Steve seconded only the draft[1], which has different wording. [0] https://lists.debian.org/debian-vote/2012/05/msg8.html [1] https://lists.debian.org/debian-vote/2012/05/msg00011.html -- Jakub Wilk -- 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/20120509235015.ga4...@jwilk.net
Re: General Resolution: Diversity statement
On Thu, 10 May 2012, Jakub Wilk wrote: * Debian Project Secretary - Kurt Roeckx secret...@debian.org, 2012-05-08, 23:28: http://www.debian.org/vote/2012/vote_002 Hmm. According to this page, the proposal[0] was seconded by Steve Langasek. However, Steve seconded only the draft[1], which has different wording. As the proposer accepted these changes (or originally made them), and Steve has not objected under §A.1.5 or §A.1.6, that doesn't really affect anything. [And based on the number of seconds, the only thing that would happen is resetting the discussion period to exactly the same period we have now.] Don Armstrong -- Everyone has to die. And in a hundred years nobody's going to inquire just how most people died. The best thing is to do it in the way that strikes your fancy most. -- Kenzaburō Ōe _Silent Cry_ p5 http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu -- 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/2012051957.gu3...@rzlab.ucr.edu
Re: General Resolution: Diversity statement
On Tue, May 08, 2012 at 11:28:31PM +0200, Debian Project Secretary - Kurt
Roeckx wrote:
A new General Resolution has been started about a diversity
statement.
More details are at:
http://www.debian.org/vote/2012/vote_002
Considering that the statement contained in the GR is the result of a
fruitful and lengthy discussion on debian-project [1], I hereby reduce
the minimum discussion period for this GR to 1 week as per Constitution
§4.2.4.
Cheers.
[1] https://lists.debian.org/debian-project/2012/03/msg00048.html
--
Stefano Zacchiroli zack@{upsilon.cc,pps.jussieu.fr,debian.org} . o .
Maître de conférences .. http://upsilon.cc/zack .. . . o
Debian Project Leader... @zack on identi.ca ...o o o
« the first rule of tautology club is the first rule of tautology club »
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Re: General Resolution: Diversity statement
On Tue, May 8, 2012 at 5:28 PM, Debian Project Secretary - Kurt Roeckx wrote: Hi, A new General Resolution has been started about a diversity statement. More details are at: http://www.debian.org/vote/2012/vote_002 Question on procedure: The initiating GR mail included the following statement Q: What will be the procedure for maintaining/updating the statement, once voted? A: The gist of the statement will be fixed by the GR. But in order to avoid needing a vote for every minor tweak, language improvements can be applied by the -www team as for other parts of www.d.o and more substantial changes, that do not change the spirit, can be discussed on -project. Given that this statement is absent in the actual GR text to be voting on, are voters to assume it will or will not have any bearing on the outcome of the vote? Personally, I think it should not; although I'm sure opinions will vary. Given that, I don't think its possible to say one way or another. So, in order to have a definitive conclusion on this matter, shouldn't it be included in the actual GR text, or as an alternative, or as an amendment? Best wishes, Mike -- 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/CANTw=MM3=2pkustn27zrnfdnnikoxsaowwnuwc76spvfww4...@mail.gmail.com
Re: General Resolution: Diversity statement
On Tue, May 08, 2012 at 05:57:40PM -0400, Michael Gilbert wrote:
So, in order to have a definitive conclusion on this matter, shouldn't
it be included in the actual GR text, or as an alternative, or as an
amendment?
The only text subject to vote is the one that will be in the GR.
Everything else is non normative.
That said, the voted text will remain accessible from
http://www.debian.org/vote/ as future memory of what the project as
voted upon, together with all other resolutions.
That would not stop to publish stuff like translations of the statement
on www.debian.org , pretty much as the fact that the Constitution itself
has been published upon hasn't (luckily!) stopped translation of it to
be published.
Similarly, and considering that the resolution procedure already takes
into account make changes to correct minor errors (for example,
typographical errors or inconsistencies) or changes which do not alter
the meaning, providing noone objects within 24 hours, I hope similar
changes could be accepted on the website if they'll ever be spotted. If
any fellow Debian Bureaucrat [1] would not consider that acceptable, I'm
pretty sure they will take the liberty to start a GR to stop the actions
of the (evil) WWW team who is trying to subvert a previous GR.
Yes, we do have a rigid Constitution that, in this particular case, is
forcing us to vote on something that was already consensual on -project.
Within that limits, let's try to keep things simple.
Cheers.
[1] https://lists.debian.org/debian-project/2012/04/msg0.html
--
Stefano Zacchiroli zack@{upsilon.cc,pps.jussieu.fr,debian.org} . o .
Maître de conférences .. http://upsilon.cc/zack .. . . o
Debian Project Leader... @zack on identi.ca ...o o o
« the first rule of tautology club is the first rule of tautology club »
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Re: General Resolution: Diversity statement
Le Tue, May 08, 2012 at 05:57:40PM -0400, Michael Gilbert a écrit : Q: What will be the procedure for maintaining/updating the statement, once voted? A: The gist of the statement will be fixed by the GR. But in order to avoid needing a vote for every minor tweak, language improvements can be applied by the -www team as for other parts of www.d.o and more substantial changes, that do not change the spirit, can be discussed on -project. Given that this statement is absent in the actual GR text to be voting on, are voters to assume it will or will not have any bearing on the outcome of the vote? Personally, I think it should not; although I'm sure opinions will vary. Given that, I don't think its possible to say one way or another. So, in order to have a definitive conclusion on this matter, shouldn't it be included in the actual GR text, or as an alternative, or as an amendment? Hi all, I hope that our constitution has the answer to that question. If a GR needed self-locking dispositions, that would go against the idea of having a constitution at all. My personal opinion is that for things that should not be changed apart with a GR, the Constitution offers the status of Foundation Document. So if the diversity statement is not a foundation document, I do not see what would forbid to change it after the GR. One problem is that the defintion of position statements about issues of the day (section 4.1.5) is not clear. Much of the driving force for this GR to be voted is its ceremonial aspect, otherwise we would be also voting on Debian's Posiiton on Software Patents, and would be digging our past decistions to see if in retrospect they need a GR as well (I am not advocating that). If a position statement is more somthing like official press releases than a law, then there would be no problem changing the diversity statement as long as it is not in a way that suggests that the updated version is the one voted in 2012. Perhaps native speakers, experienced members, or our Secretary can clarify what position statements about issues of the day means, and what is the consequence of having issues of the day limiting position statements. Have a nice day, -- Charles Plessy Tsurumi, Kanagawa, Japan -- 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/20120508222110.gb32...@falafel.plessy.net
Re: General Resolution: Diversity statement
On Wed, May 09, 2012 at 12:15:42AM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
That would not stop to publish stuff like translations of the statement
on www.debian.org , pretty much as the fact that the Constitution itself
has been published upon hasn't (luckily!) stopped translation of it to
^
voted
be published.
--
Stefano Zacchiroli zack@{upsilon.cc,pps.jussieu.fr,debian.org} . o .
Maître de conférences .. http://upsilon.cc/zack .. . . o
Debian Project Leader... @zack on identi.ca ...o o o
« the first rule of tautology club is the first rule of tautology club »
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
