On Wed, 25 Feb 2004 14:14:40 -0500, Theodore Ts'o <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> On Tue, Feb 24, 2004 at 01:42:23PM -0600, Debian Project Secretary
> wrote:
>>
>> General Resolution: Status of the non-free section Text: The actual
>> text of the GR is:
>>
>> The next release of Debian will not be accompanied by a non-free
>> section; there will be no more stable releases of the non-free
>> section. The Debian project will cease active support of the
>> non-free section. Clause 5 of the social contract is repealed.
>>
>> Since this modifies the Social Contract, thsi requires a 3:1
>> majority to pass.
>>
>>
>> Amendment Anthony Towns [EMAIL PROTECTED] Amendment Text The actual
>> text of the amendment is: Propose that the Debian project resolve
>> that:
>>
>> Acknowledging that some of our users continue to require the use of
>> programs that don't conform to the Debian Free Software Guidelines,
>> we reaffirm our commitment to providing the contrib and non-free
>> areas in our archive for packaged versions of such software, and to
>> providing the use of our infrastructure (such as our bug-tracking
>> system and mailing lists) to help with the maintenance of non-free
>> software packages.
> Umm.... this is very confusing. Are we expected to cast votes for
> both the amendment and the general resolution at the same time?
Yes.
> Whether or not the Amendment carries is going to make an extreme and
> material different as to how I would vote on the General Resolution,
Umm, why? Vote for the amendment over the default option and
the original resolution, if that is how you feel.
> since the Amendmend effectively changes the sense of the Resolution
> by 180 degrees.
Quite. So only one of the two may win.
> If we are forced to cast both votes at the same time, someone who
> wants to keep non-free and who votes aye to both the Amendment and
> the Resolution may find themselves inadvertently voting to ditch
I suggest you read up on our voting mechanisms. To that
hypothetical person, I would say vote the original proposal below the
default, and the amendment above the default optio.
> non-free. On the flip side, someone who wants to jettison non-free
> could vote aye to the Resolution and nay to the amendment, could if
> the amendment carries, inadvertently end up voting to keep non-free,
> which would not be their intent.
This really demonstrates a profound ignorance of our voting
process; please read up on the new mechanisms at
http://www.debian.org/devel/constitution
We delayed this vote for nearly four years so that we could
get a voting process that can handle exactly this conundrum.
> As someone who would like to see non-free be kept, I suppose the
> valid strategy, assume we are forced to vote on both the amendment
> and the resolution at the same time, would be vote "nay" to the
> resolution, and "aye" to the amendment, since if the resolution
> fails, the status quo would prevail, and the votes on the amendment
> could be used to provide a moral mandate one way or another about
> how DD's feel on this issue.
This is wrong. The amendment can succed on its own, even if
the resolution falls.
> This seems like a fairly convulting situation, however, and being
> forced to vote on both seems to require a certain amount of gaming
> one's vote, which is in my opinion, undesirable.
Wrong again. Would you please read up on condortcet before
continuing with this rant?
manoj
--
cause when love is gone, there's always justice. and when justice is
gone, there's always force. and when force is gone, there's always
mom. laurie anderson
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024R/C7261095 print CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C
