Re: Draft ballot for the Project membership procedures vote
On Wed, Dec 03, 2008 at 05:21:16PM +, Neil McGovern wrote: [ ] Choice 1: Ask the DAMs to postpone the changes until vote or concensus. [ ] Choice 2: Invite the DAM to further discuss until vote or concensus, leading to a new proposal. s/concensus/consensus/ ? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Draft ballot for the Project membership procedures vote
On Wed, Dec 03, 2008 at 03:01:36PM -0600, Guilherme de S. Pastore wrote: On Wed, Dec 03, 2008 at 05:21:16PM +, Neil McGovern wrote: [ ] Choice 1: Ask the DAMs to postpone the changes until vote or concensus. [ ] Choice 2: Invite the DAM to further discuss until vote or concensus, leading to a new proposal. s/concensus/consensus/ ? Adjusted, thanks. Neil -- Roses are Red Violets are Blue In Soviet Russia Poem writes YOU!! signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Draft ballot for the Project membership procedures vote
Le Wed, Dec 03, 2008 at 05:21:16PM +, Neil McGovern a écrit : Hi all, Here's the draft ballot for the GR. Please note the timescale and reply ASAP. Hi Neil The vote page has three mutually exclusive texts, with headers named Choice 1, Choice 2 and Choice 3 that respectively correspond to Choice 2, Choice 1 and Choice 3 in the ballot. I am affraid it is misleading. Shall I commit a change to the webpage to reorder and / or renumber the choices? http://www.debian.org/vote/2008/vote_002 Also, you removed and all the contributors in Choice2 of the ballot (Choice 1 of the GR), which in my opinion is crucial. But since after the vote of the GR, the wording of the choices has no role in iterpreting the GR, just go ahead if you disagree. Have a nice day, -- Charles -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Draft ballot for the Project membership procedures vote
On Thu, Dec 04, 2008 at 08:44:32AM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote: Le Wed, Dec 03, 2008 at 05:21:16PM +, Neil McGovern a écrit : Hi all, Here's the draft ballot for the GR. Please note the timescale and reply ASAP. Hi Neil The vote page has three mutually exclusive texts, with headers named Choice 1, Choice 2 and Choice 3 that respectively correspond to Choice 2, Choice 1 and Choice 3 in the ballot. I am affraid it is misleading. Shall I commit a change to the webpage to reorder and / or renumber the choices? I've removed the numbers which should appear shortly. Also, you removed and all the contributors in Choice2 of the ballot (Choice 1 of the GR), which in my opinion is crucial. But since after the vote of the GR, the wording of the choices has no role in iterpreting the GR, just go ahead if you disagree. I don't agree I'm afraid. Thanks, Neil -- Yoe is _that_ gunnar? weasel yes Yoe what happened to his tires? towersbe He's shrunk. I think his wife washed him at too high a temperature. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Draft ballot for the Project membership procedures vote
On 04/12/08 at 09:44 +0900, Charles Plessy wrote: Le Thu, Dec 04, 2008 at 12:05:39AM +, Neil McGovern a écrit : Also, you removed and all the contributors in Choice2 of the ballot (Choice 1 of the GR), which in my opinion is crucial. But since after the vote of the GR, the wording of the choices has no role in iterpreting the GR, just go ahead if you disagree. I don't agree I'm afraid. I regret that you did not feedback when I made propositions for the ballot and that you do not explain why you disagree. I think that your wording is detrimental to the choice that is the least embarassing for Jörg (or second least, after further discussion), but I accept your decision and will not discuss further unless invited to do so. Bah, the wording of this choice is so convoluted in the GR that it's impossible to summarize it in a few words in the ballot, so I'm fine with what Neil came up with. For example, I would have liked to see Thank the DAM, invite the DAM to further discuss until vote or concensus, leading to a new proposal.. The fact that the proposal explicitely thanks the DAM was a reason for which several DDs said that they wouldn't vote it above FD. -- | Lucas Nussbaum | [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.lucas-nussbaum.net/ | | jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] GPG: 1024D/023B3F4F | -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
