Re: Rationale for GRs
Peter Samuelson pe...@p12n.org writes: [Matthew Vernon] I would like to propose, therefore, the requirement that anyone proposing a GR be required to provide a short (no more than, say, 500 words) summary of why they believe the GR to be necessary. A similar requirement would apply to those proposing an amendment. If the rationale is a required part of a GR, should it be treated as normative or informative? In other words, if I agree with the text of a GR, but disagree with its posted rationale, am I supposed to vote for or against it? Informative, I think. If you agree with the proposed motion, you should vote for it, even if you think the rationale is incorrect. Regards, Matthew -- At least you know where you are with Microsoft. True. I just wish I'd brought a paddle. http://www.debian.org -- 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/5bzkowss1k@chiark.greenend.org.uk
Re: Rationale for GRs
[Matthew Vernon] I would like to propose, therefore, the requirement that anyone proposing a GR be required to provide a short (no more than, say, 500 words) summary of why they believe the GR to be necessary. A similar requirement would apply to those proposing an amendment. If the rationale is a required part of a GR, should it be treated as normative or informative? In other words, if I agree with the text of a GR, but disagree with its posted rationale, am I supposed to vote for or against it? -- Peter Samuelson | org-tld!p12n!peter | http://p12n.org/ -- 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/20110314185704.ga30...@p12n.org
Re: Rationale for GRs
Matthew Vernon wrote: I've been thinking for a while now that it would be good if general resolutions had a Rationale with them. At the moment, it can be difficult to establish the key arguments for and against a particular proposal, unless you have the time to wade through an often-lengthy thread on debian-vote, which not all DDs read. Full ack. -- .''`. : :' : As Freud said, sometimes a cigar is just a cigar. `. `' `-Proudly running Debian GNU/Linux signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Rationale for GRs
On 11/03/11 12:41, Matthew Vernon wrote: Hi, I've been thinking for a while now that it would be good if general resolutions had a Rationale with them. At the moment, it can be difficult to establish the key arguments for and against a particular proposal, unless you have the time to wade through an often-lengthy thread on debian-vote, which not all DDs read. I would like to propose, therefore, the requirement that anyone proposing a GR be required to provide a short (no more than, say, 500 words) summary of why they believe the GR to be necessary. A similar requirement would apply to those proposing an amendment. In the interests of fairness, those opposed to a proposal but not wishing to amend it should also be allowed a rationale. My suggestion here would be that A set of DDs (equivalent to the requirement for amendments) could have an opposing rationale added to the GR; I would envisage only one of these per GR. Thoughts? Won't this require a GR to put it into force? -- 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/4d7a23b0.6020...@debian.org
Re: Rationale for GRs
On 11/03/11 15:18, Martin Bagge / brother wrote: On 2011-03-11 14:29, Martin Meredith wrote: Won't this require a GR to put it into force? Probably. Is that in it self a problem Depends, Recursion is never really a good thing. -- 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/4d7a4169@debian.org
Re: Rationale for GRs
On 2011-03-11 14:29, Martin Meredith wrote: Won't this require a GR to put it into force? Probably. Is that in it self a problem? -- brother http://sis.bthstudent.se -- 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/4d7a3d43.8040...@debian.org
Re: Rationale for GRs
Le vendredi 11 mars 2011 à 13:29 +, Martin Meredith a écrit : On 11/03/11 12:41, Matthew Vernon wrote: I've been thinking for a while now that it would be good if general resolutions had a Rationale with them. Won't this require a GR to put it into force? What is the rationale for that change? -- .''`. : :' : “You would need to ask a lawyer if you don't know `. `' that a handshake of course makes a valid contract.” `--- J???rg Schilling -- 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/1299859255.7054.102.camel@meh
Re: Rationale for GRs
On Fri, 11 Mar 2011, Matthew Vernon wrote: In the interests of fairness, those opposed to a proposal but not wishing to amend it should also be allowed a rationale. My suggestion here would be that A set of DDs (equivalent to the requirement for amendments) could have an opposing rationale added to the GR; I would envisage only one of these per GR. I think this is the sort of thing that can be done on an ad-hoc basis; the secretary can decide to nominate a rationale and a rebuttal to the rationale for each option, indicating who signs on to the rationale and rebuttal on the appropriate vote page. [Or just link to the appropriate point in the -vote archives where the rationale and rebuttal were posted.] Don Armstrong -- LEADERSHIP -- A form of self-preservation exhibited by people with autodestructive imaginations in order to ensure that when it comes to the crunch it'll be someone else's bones which go crack and not their own. -- The HipCrime Vocab by Chad C. Mulligan (John Brunner _Stand On Zanzibar_ p256-7) 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/20110311193427.gn23...@teltox.donarmstrong.com
Re: Rationale for GRs
Martin Meredith m...@debian.org writes: On 11/03/11 12:41, Matthew Vernon wrote: [snip my proposal] Won't this require a GR to put it into force? I think so, yes. But I thought I'd gather opinions and refine it a bit first. Regards, Matthew -- At least you know where you are with Microsoft. True. I just wish I'd brought a paddle. http://www.debian.org -- 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/5baah1tg5d@chiark.greenend.org.uk
