On Sat, Jan 10, 2004 at 06:44:33AM +0100, Sven Luther wrote: > John, you are a fraud, you don't really want to resolve this issue, only
If that were the case, why did I: 1. Get this issue to a vote back in 2000[1] (though that vote was later nullified); 2. Second the proposals before us now, moving them closer to getting voted on now; 3. Oppose delaying tactics such as unnecessary "surveys"; 4. Oppose GR proposals that cannot be actually voted on in any sane fashion due to being incompatible with procedures in the Constitution. I literally started trying to resolve this nearly *four years* ago. Not only can I tell you, up front and completely honestly, that I want this resolved; you can also see, as a matter of public record, that this has been the case for years. Votes were taken (though never counted) on my own 2000 proposal, which -- if you were to read it -- you'll see not only resolved the non-free issue but also the social contract one. > Go fix some RC bugs, and help make sarge releasable instead of loosing > everyone's time with unending discussions you have no intentions to > concretize anyway. I guess unsubscribing from -vote is too difficult for you? You might notice that I *am* fixing RC bugs, such as #221329. > See you when you have actually proposed something, and there is an Where have you been? I find this incredibly ironic that people are telling me to shut up until I propose something, when I already did *ALMOST FOUR YEARS AGO*. I simply have no response for that one. > actual vote going on, and then we can discuss things. And expect a few Oh come on, we can't discuss things untill a CFV is issued? What kind of a silly rule is that? > ammendment from my part if your proposals are as ridicoulous and > dishonest as the ones that have been passing around lately. [1] http://www.debian.org/vote/2000/vote_0008
