On Mon, Jan 12, 2009 at 04:12:57AM -0500, Daniel Dickinson wrote: > As for trying to bully people about consitution and the social contract > et al, I think you need to remember that the Debian Project is a > concept not an incorporated (or otherwise formally recognized by any > government as an organization) body. The 'consitution' and 'social > contract' exist only insofar as the developers agree they do, either by > action or inaction.
Agreed. > If you want to argue constutional matters in debian you have to make > sure you're not just making noise but are in fact supported other > developers. Indeed. > If most developers think that Bdale's interpretation makes > sense Nope. You only got that impression because the ones supporting this interpretation are the ones making the most noise. If you want to know for real, check the vote results. You'll see how option 2 beats option 4. And I lost count on how many times I repeated that, but will do as long as necessary. -- Robert Millan The DRM opt-in fallacy: "Your data belongs to us. We will decide when (and how) you may access your data; but nobody's threatening your freedom: we still allow you to remove your data and not access it at all." -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
