* Graham Wilson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [040524 20:10]: > On Mon, May 24, 2004 at 10:12:52AM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote: > > * Debian Project Secretary ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [040523 23:55]: > > > I do not think we can over ride the constitution, and other > > > foundation documents, with a simple position statement; so I would > > > not think a simple position statement can trump the SC. > > > > I think we can override it with a position statement that has the same > > requirements as a change of the fundation document, i.e. this position > > statement would require a 3:1-majority.
> What is the constitutional basis for you thinking this? If the developers could change this fundation document by the very same way, and they explicitly only do an override for a specific situation instead of putting more text into this fundation document, why shouldn't this be allowed? (Or perhaps view it just as a very implicit change to the fundation document. Our constitution does not disallow this.) Cheers, Andi -- http://home.arcor.de/andreas-barth/ PGP 1024/89FB5CE5 DC F1 85 6D A6 45 9C 0F 3B BE F1 D0 C5 D1 D9 0C -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
