On Sat, 30 Sep 2000, Anthony Towns wrote: > On Wed, Sep 27, 2000 at 04:31:56AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote: > > There hasn't been any other attempt to reconcile the above three points > > of view. So much for consensus building. > > So, uh, would anyone like to actual suggest some course of action that > might be acceptable to everyone, rather than just insisting that their > particular preference is how it will be done, and everyone else is > uninformed, ignorant, apathetic, dictatorial, or whatever? > > Should we have another vote to see if the social contract deserves > supermajority protection? Is there some other way of doing things that > won't require a boring mass of legalese or continued pointless ineffectual > flaming and counter-flaming? > > (I think our constitution is broken: we're having too many votes on every > minor issue. Logo and logo swap; Social contract majority; how to amend; > whether to amend...)
Who do you think you are? How dare you try to put out the fire. ----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK---- Version: 3.12 GCS d- s: a-- c+++ UL++++ P+ L++++ !E W+ M o+ K- W--- !O M- !V PS-- PE++ Y+ PGP++ t* 5++ X+ tv b+ D++ G e h*! !r z? -----END GEEK CODE BLOCK----- ----BEGIN PGP INFO---- Adam Heath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Finger Print | KeyID 67 01 42 93 CA 37 FB 1E 63 C9 80 1D 08 CF 84 0A | DE656B05 PGP AD46 C888 F587 F8A3 A6DA 3261 8A2C 7DC2 8BD4 A489 | 8BD4A489 GPG -----END PGP INFO----- Proposal: I believe that Debian, as it currently stands, is not yet ready for the end of this flame. I therefore, propose that we do not stop attacking each other, and continue on with the status quo.
