Manoj Srivastava wrote: > On Wed, Dec 17 2008, Luk Claes wrote: > >> Manoj Srivastava wrote: >>> On Tue, Dec 16 2008, Matthew Woodcraft wrote: > >>>> If the proposer of vote/2003/vote_0003 had intended it to give the >>>> Secretary power to impose supermajority requirements on the grounds >>>> that an option conflicts with a foundation document, one would have >>>> expected him to have said so explicitly. >>> So, in your opinion, which decision making entity is empowered >>> by the constitution to make decisions about super majority >>> requirements? What are the constraints on their ability to decide on >>> this? What should they be looking at, apart from the constitution, to >>> decide whether a super majority rule should apply? >> I would think the explicit overriding or removal of parts of foundation >> documents aka changing them as I read it in the constitution (but >> apparently my interpretation differs from yours). > > Parse error. Which entity did you mean? Or are you just > answering the last question? Does that mean we can just not follow the > foundation documents by doing something different, but just not saying > explicitly we are over riding them?
Nope, position statements are more like statements telling how to interprete foundation documents, noone is trying to change them. Cheers Luk -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
