Craig Sanders <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > in this particular case, the GR was proposed with a misleading title > (it was NOT a simple "editorial" change, it was a radical change to > the meaning of the Social Contract which will ultimately result in > the death by irrelevance of debian) and effectively got through by > stealth.
I see. Hrm. It's curious that you never raised this objection during the process. > very few actually voted, roughly half the number that > normally votes. We very recently passed the amendments to the Constitution which give our rules for amending the Social Contract. I don't recall you complaining that the quorum required was too low, but maybe I missed that. Nor was this half the number that usually votes. The last DPL election and GR were extraordinary; this vote was about the usual number. Go look at the history. > in any case, it has already been established that the GR had serious > problems - there is an existing proposal concerning it. I believe that any serious problem here is one that the release manager created. I'm happy to address it. Thomas
