Nick Phillips <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> documents. It clearly asserts otherwise, and one might assume that
> developers voting for it would agree with that. If it won a majority,
> it would therefore seem to be the case that the majority of developers
> agreed with it. In which case those asserting that it needed
> supermajority wouldn't have a leg to stand on. So we'd be in a right
> mess.

Clearly if the 3:1 supermajority requirement means anything, it cannot
be obviated merely by a simple majority declaring "there is no
contradiction".  

Thomas


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

Reply via email to