Hi Ian, A brief message from me this time!
At 2025-04-10T17:50:16+0100, Ian Jackson wrote: [...] > You're right that we're suffering because of the lack of working > mechanisms, short of GR, for situations like this. I agree with you and Russ that my interpretation "challenge" is not an urgent matter. Since I'm in a minority of one in my views (just like the good old days!), I think people can understand that I'm also in no hurry to see cement poured over rejection of my interpretation. ;-) (...without exploration of the perverse consequence I think arises from said rejection...) > Instead, the Leadership is supposed to be the front-line mechanism for > oversight of Delegates, but it isn't working. That's one of the "more > fundamental problems" that I was suggesting would be a better focus. I add that more Developers should be thinking about questions of Constitutional interpretation more often, if they want to preserve the democratic governance structures that we have, including ones that haven't been weakened by failures to oversee Delegates. To some Developers, such practice may feel awkward, and the muscles of parsing legalistic language may require unaccustomed exercise. But it's worth doing. ...if we want to keep our democratic form of government. If we don't, we can expect to be governed by personal cliques, fear, and intimidation. Citizenship, whatever the polity, is incompatible with passivity. Regards, Branden
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
