On Sat, Jun 19, 2004 at 02:11:14PM +0100, Andrew Suffield wrote: > Summary: you probably want 3 or 6.
We've had this discussion a while ago. What's the idea? Getting people
to vote the way you think is most appropriate?
> On Fri, Jun 18, 2004 at 12:59:33PM -0500, Debian Project Secretary wrote:
> > [ ] Choice 1: Postpone changes until September 2004 [needs 3:1]
> > [ ] Choice 2: Postpone changes until Sarge releases [needs 3:1]
> > [ ] Choice 3: Add apology to Social Contract [needs 3:1]
> > [ ] Choice 4: Revert to old wording of SC [needs 3:1]
> > [ ] Choice 5: "Transition Guide" foundation document [needs 3:1]
> > [ ] Choice 6: Reaffirm the current SC [needs 1:1]
> > [ ] Choice 7: Further discussion
>
> Options 1-3 are essentially clones with subtle variations. 2 is the
> same as 1, but without the time limit. 3 is the same as 2, but is less
> intrusive
Modifying the social contract permanently (as opposed to temporarily
overruling it) to address temporary problems is seen as "less
intrusive"?
[...]
> It is unfortunate that these three options were not combined, but
> there has been something of a buckshot approach to the construction of
> this ballot. Option 3 is essentially the refined version of 1 and 2.
Maybe in your opinion. Option 3 goes one step further than 1 and 2 in
that it further modifies the SC. I for one think that's a bridge too far
(I don't want to go through all this *again*).
> Option 5 may in itself be a good idea, but it is essentially
> orthogonal here, and worse, it doesn't actually answer the question of
> "what do we do about sarge?" - it just says "carry on", which says
> "non-free release" if you were expecting a non-free release and "free
> release" if you were expecting a free release.
Actually, it says "we reaffirm the previous GR, but it won't be active
before the next release". It could be seen as a compromise between
option 6 and some of the other options on the ballot.
> Option 6 is the other position - that free software is what matters.
Indeed. It also "happens" to be the option you proposed; and you are not
listed as seconder on one of the other options.
The discussion period is over, Andrew. If you think some of the options
shouldn't have been on the ballot, you should've said so before. You
didn't, AFAIK. So, leave it at that, and don't pretend to offer voting
advice when all you really do is advocate your own position. If you want
to advocate your own position, that's fine, there's nothing wrong with
that; but in that case, please say "summary: you probably want 6"
instead of this.
Thanks.
[...snip advocating brabble...]
--
EARTH
smog | bricks
AIR -- mud -- FIRE
soda water | tequila
WATER
-- with thanks to fortune
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
