On Fri, Sep 25, 2015 at 05:51:45PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Wouter Verhelst writes ("Re: GR: Constitutional Amendment to fix an
> off-by-one error and duplicate section numbering"):
> > Having given this some more thought, I believe I've come to understand
> > why you don't see this to be such
On Sat, Sep 26, 2015 at 12:41:39PM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> If you're referring to the casting vote exception in the proposal, you
> urgently need to reread §5.1.7 of the constitution: the DPL has a
> casting vote for GRs!
Actually, you were referring to sections (iv) and (v) of the
> "Ian" == Ian Jackson writes:
>> Do we throw said change away? We probably can't, because it's
>> still a non-binding resolution, or something.
Ian> In these cases, my proposal produces `FD'.
>> Put otherwise, the idea of a "non-binding
Hi Ian,
Having given this some more thought, I believe I've come to understand
why you don't see this to be such a crazy idea as I believe it is.
On Tue, Sep 01, 2015 at 12:20:05PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Kurt Roeckx writes ("Re: GR: Constitutional Amendment to fix an off-by-one
> error and
Wouter Verhelst writes ("Re: GR: Constitutional Amendment to fix an off-by-one
error and duplicate section numbering"):
> Having given this some more thought, I believe I've come to understand
> why you don't see this to be such a crazy idea as I believe it is.
...
> This works for votes where
Hi Ian,
On Tue, Sep 01, 2015 at 12:20:05PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> The intent of this change is that if the Condorcet(CSSD) winner does
> not meet the supermajority requirement, it is still the winning
> outcome of the whole vote, but only as a non-binding statement of
> opinion.
>
> So for
On Tue, Sep 01, 2015 at 07:32:34PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> * Kurt Roeckx (k...@roeckx.be) [150829 16:03]:
> > (Or I might be totally confused about the effects of all the
> > changes you're doing. Those are all non-obvious changes that seem
> > to change more than the things you want to
* Didier 'OdyX' Raboud (o...@debian.org) [150901 13:52]:
> It'd be good if you (as well as Andreas, as GR proposer) could comment
> on the full series of commits in that repository, to make sure we all
> agree on a constitution diff.
Up to now
* Kurt Roeckx (k...@roeckx.be) [150829 16:03]:
> (Or I might be totally confused about the effects of all the
> changes you're doing. Those are all non-obvious changes that seem
> to change more than the things you want to fix.)
IMHO your questions should be answered by others already, plus the
Le mardi, 1 septembre 2015, 12.20:05 Ian Jackson a écrit :
> Kurt Roeckx writes ("Re: GR: Constitutional Amendment to fix an off-
by-one error and duplicate section numbering"):
> > On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 10:12:41PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> > >(i) Delete most of A.6(3) (which implemented
Kurt Roeckx writes ("Re: GR: Constitutional Amendment to fix an off-by-one
error and duplicate section numbering"):
> On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 10:12:41PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> >(i) Delete most of A.6(3) (which implemented the supermajority
> >by dropping options at an early stage).
Didier 'OdyX' Raboud writes ("Re: GR: Constitutional Amendment to fix an
off-by-one error and duplicate section numbering"):
> Le mardi, 1 septembre 2015, 12.20:05 Ian Jackson a écrit :
> > I think I intended that this should read A.6(4)(0).
> > ^^^
> >
On Wednesday 26 August 2015 15:18:36 Russ Allbery wrote:
> I second the below text, for both changes.
FWIW, at least on my mail client I'm failing to verify this signature.
Not that is *that* important considering the number of seconds already
available, but I thought it was better to make it
On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 05:30:38PM -0300, Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer
wrote:
> On Wednesday 26 August 2015 15:18:36 Russ Allbery wrote:
> > I second the below text, for both changes.
>
> FWIW, at least on my mail client I'm failing to verify this signature.
> Not that is *that* important
Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer writes:
> On Wednesday 26 August 2015 15:18:36 Russ Allbery wrote:
>> I second the below text, for both changes.
> FWIW, at least on my mail client I'm failing to verify this signature.
> Not that is *that* important considering the
On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 10:12:41PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
(i) Delete most of A.6(3) (which implemented the supermajority
by dropping options at an early stage). Specifically:
- Move A.6(3)(1) (the definition of V(A,B)) to a new subparagraph
A.6(3)(0) before A.6(3)(1).
Andreas Barth a...@ayous.org writes:
Constitutional Amendment: TC Supermajority Fix
Seconded.
Bdale
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 10:12:41PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
Hi together,
we (as the Technical Committee) have encountered two bugs in the
constitution which we like to fix. For this reason, I propose the following
General Resolution to change the constitution.
So I see 5 seconds, so the
Le jeudi, 27 août 2015, 10.04:50 Stefano Zacchiroli a écrit :
On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 10:12:41PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
we (as the Technical Committee) have encountered two bugs in the
constitution which we like to fix. For this reason, I propose the
following General Resolution to
I second both parts of the GR below.
Andreas Barth a...@ayous.org writes:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi together,
we (as the Technical Committee) have encountered two bugs in the
constitution which we like to fix. For this reason, I propose the following
General
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 26/08/15 21:12, Andreas Barth wrote:
- GENERAL RESOLUTION STARTS -
Constitutional Amendment: TC Supermajority Fix
Prior to the Clone Proof SSD GR in June 2003, the Technical
Committee could overrule a Developer with a
On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 10:12:41PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
we (as the Technical Committee) have encountered two bugs in the
constitution which we like to fix. For this reason, I propose the following
General Resolution to change the constitution.
Can we have a diff and a word-diff please?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi together,
we (as the Technical Committee) have encountered two bugs in the
constitution which we like to fix. For this reason, I propose the following
General Resolution to change the constitution.
Please note that we put both issues into one GR
I second the below text, for both changes.
Andreas Barth a...@ayous.org writes:
- GENERAL RESOLUTION STARTS -
Constitutional Amendment: TC Supermajority Fix
Prior to the Clone Proof SSD GR in June 2003, the Technical
Committee could overrule a Developer with a
Le mercredi, 26 août 2015, 22.12:41 Andreas Barth a écrit :
- GENERAL RESOLUTION STARTS -
Constitutional Amendment: TC Supermajority Fix
Prior to the Clone Proof SSD GR in June 2003, the Technical
Committee could overrule a Developer with a supermajority of 3:1.
also sprach Andreas Barth a...@ayous.org [2015-08-26 22:12 +0200]:
we (as the Technical Committee) have encountered two bugs in the
constitution which we like to fix. For this reason, I propose the
following General Resolution to change the constitution.
Seconded.
--
.''`. martin f.
26 matches
Mail list logo