On Tue, Oct 31, 2000 at 05:56:24AM -0500, Raul Miller wrote:
> He's gotten a lot of negative criticism from the folks on this list.
> A number of people (who, near as I can tell, haven't even read what the
> constitution has to say about his job) have made all sorts of comments
> about how they thi
On Tue, Oct 31, 2000 at 05:56:24AM -0500, Raul Miller wrote:
> He's gotten a lot of negative criticism from the folks on this list.
> A number of people (who, near as I can tell, haven't even read what the
> constitution has to say about his job) have made all sorts of comments
> about how they th
On Tue, Oct 31, 2000 at 12:27:26PM -0500, Raul Miller wrote:
> > Actually there was an urgency. There isn't now, because the vote ended
> > 10/23/2000, with no response from Darren after 10/10/2000 (unless I
> > inadvertantly deleted something, which is quite possible, so feel free
> > to correct m
On Tue, Oct 31, 2000 at 07:58:30AM -0600, Christian T. Steigies wrote:
> > > John's proposal is, IMO, a reaction to a growing movement within Debian
> >
> > So, why confuse the issue ?
> >
> > What's so difficult about it ?
>
> Just two things:
> - who is John?
> - please stop CCing me when I sa
On Tue, Oct 31, 2000 at 11:10:10AM -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
> My complaint is with a very confusing ballot, that promised a second
> ballot. It's with a www.debian.org/vote page that can't even keep up
> to date with the current status of anything.
I understand.
However, at the momen
On 31-Oct-00, 11:27 (CST), Raul Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 31, 2000 at 10:26:19AM -0600, Steve Greenland wrote:
> > That's not completely obvious to those of us reading the lists.
>
> Well, maybe it wasn't obvious, but it should be obvious now. Or
> do you think I'm lying?
On Tue, Oct 31, 2000 at 12:27:26PM -0500, Raul Miller wrote:
> > Actually there was an urgency. There isn't now, because the vote ended
> > 10/23/2000, with no response from Darren after 10/10/2000 (unless I
> > inadvertantly deleted something, which is quite possible, so feel free
> > to correct
On Tue, Oct 31, 2000 at 07:58:30AM -0600, Christian T. Steigies wrote:
> > > John's proposal is, IMO, a reaction to a growing movement within Debian
> >
> > So, why confuse the issue ?
> >
> > What's so difficult about it ?
>
> Just two things:
> - who is John?
> - please stop CCing me when I s
On Tue, Oct 31, 2000 at 11:10:10AM -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
> My complaint is with a very confusing ballot, that promised a second
> ballot. It's with a www.debian.org/vote page that can't even keep up
> to date with the current status of anything.
I understand.
However, at the mome
* Thomas Bushnell, BSG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [001031 11:12]:
> It looks for all the world like he just vanished. It's a volunteer
> organization, but one of our guidelines is that if a person vanishes,
> they should say "I'm vanishing for a bit".
Does anyone know Darren's phone number?
--
``Oh
On 31-Oct-00, 11:27 (CST), Raul Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 31, 2000 at 10:26:19AM -0600, Steve Greenland wrote:
> > That's not completely obvious to those of us reading the lists.
>
> Well, maybe it wasn't obvious, but it should be obvious now. Or
> do you think I'm lying?
Raul Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> First off, Darren wrote me last week and explained what he was doing.
> I didn't forward the information to the list at the time, because
> I wanted to give him time to wrap things up. So, while there's some
> potential here I'm not approaching this from
On Tue, Oct 31, 2000 at 12:27:26PM -0500, Raul Miller wrote:
> > We have no right or ability to force participation from our members,
> > but it would be polite for someone in such a (currently) critical
> > position to ask for help when needed.
>
> Sure, but given the negative remarks people have
On Mon, Oct 30, 2000 at 06:38:53PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
> > > We need a secretary, now, to deal with the current situation and to
> > > focus on procedure.
On 31-Oct-00, 04:56 (CST), Raul Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > We *have* one.
On Tue, Oct 31, 2000 at 10:26:19AM -0600,
On Tue, Oct 31, 2000 at 02:29:07PM +0100, Sven LUTHER wrote:
> Should we also add the DFSG here ?
[1] I had already withdrawn the proposal by the time you wrote
this. There could have already been an ammendment at that time.
I appreciate your enthusiasm, but I'd like it if you could catch
up on d
* Thomas Bushnell, BSG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [001031 11:12]:
> It looks for all the world like he just vanished. It's a volunteer
> organization, but one of our guidelines is that if a person vanishes,
> they should say "I'm vanishing for a bit".
Does anyone know Darren's phone number?
--
``Oh
Raul Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> First off, Darren wrote me last week and explained what he was doing.
> I didn't forward the information to the list at the time, because
> I wanted to give him time to wrap things up. So, while there's some
> potential here I'm not approaching this from
On 20001031T142907+0100, Sven LUTHER wrote:
> > C. The Social Contract
[...]
> Should we also add the DFSG here ?
DFSG is a part of the Social Contract.
--
%%% Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho % [EMAIL PROTECTED] % http://www.iki.fi/gaia/ %%%
On 31-Oct-00, 04:56 (CST), Raul Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 30, 2000 at 06:38:53PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
> > We need a secretary, now, to deal with the current situation and to
> > focus on procedure.
>
> We *have* one.
That's not completely obvious to those of u
On Tue, Oct 31, 2000 at 12:27:26PM -0500, Raul Miller wrote:
> > We have no right or ability to force participation from our members,
> > but it would be polite for someone in such a (currently) critical
> > position to ask for help when needed.
>
> Sure, but given the negative remarks people hav
On Mon, Oct 30, 2000 at 06:38:53PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
> > > We need a secretary, now, to deal with the current situation and to
> > > focus on procedure.
On 31-Oct-00, 04:56 (CST), Raul Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > We *have* one.
On Tue, Oct 31, 2000 at 10:26:19AM -0600
On Tue, Oct 31, 2000 at 02:29:07PM +0100, Sven LUTHER wrote:
> Should we also add the DFSG here ?
[1] I had already withdrawn the proposal by the time you wrote
this. There could have already been an ammendment at that time.
I appreciate your enthusiasm, but I'd like it if you could catch
up on
On 20001031T142907+0100, Sven LUTHER wrote:
> > C. The Social Contract
[...]
> Should we also add the DFSG here ?
DFSG is a part of the Social Contract.
--
%%% Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho % [EMAIL PROTECTED] % http://www.iki.fi/gaia/ %%%
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subj
On 31-Oct-00, 04:56 (CST), Raul Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 30, 2000 at 06:38:53PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
> > We need a secretary, now, to deal with the current situation and to
> > focus on procedure.
>
> We *have* one.
That's not completely obvious to those of
On Tue, Oct 31, 2000 at 02:27:46PM +0100, Sven LUTHER wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 28, 2000 at 09:40:52PM -0500, Joseph Carter wrote:
> >
> > John's proposal is, IMO, a reaction to a growing movement within Debian
>
> So, why confuse the issue ?
>
> What's so difficult about it ?
Just two things:
- who
On Mon, Oct 30, 2000 at 07:36:09PM -0500, Raul Miller wrote:
> Some views on the relationship of the constitution
> and the social contract:
>
> Ian Jackson: http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-9803/msg01778.html
> Darren Benham: http://lists.debian.org/debian-vote-0010/msg00019.html
> Wichert Ac
On Sat, Oct 28, 2000 at 09:40:52PM -0500, Joseph Carter wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 26, 2000 at 04:08:03AM -0500, Christian T. Steigies wrote:
> > > You miss my point, i am not speaking about big companies but about smaller
> > > groups, individuals or research institues or other such.
> > If you continue
On Tue, Oct 31, 2000 at 02:27:46PM +0100, Sven LUTHER wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 28, 2000 at 09:40:52PM -0500, Joseph Carter wrote:
> >
> > John's proposal is, IMO, a reaction to a growing movement within Debian
>
> So, why confuse the issue ?
>
> What's so difficult about it ?
Just two things:
- wh
On Mon, Oct 30, 2000 at 07:36:09PM -0500, Raul Miller wrote:
> Some views on the relationship of the constitution
> and the social contract:
>
> Ian Jackson: http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-9803/msg01778.html
> Darren Benham: http://lists.debian.org/debian-vote-0010/msg00019.html
> Wichert A
On Sat, Oct 28, 2000 at 09:40:52PM -0500, Joseph Carter wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 26, 2000 at 04:08:03AM -0500, Christian T. Steigies wrote:
> > > You miss my point, i am not speaking about big companies but about smaller
> > > groups, individuals or research institues or other such.
> > If you continu
[First off, to avoid a bunch of silly posts: before responding to this
message, please catch up on reading debian-vote. If there's thirty or
so messages following this one it's pretty likely that what you want to
say in response has already been said. Thanks.]
On Mon, Oct 30, 2000 at 06:38:53PM
On Sat, Oct 28, 2000 at 09:40:52PM -0500, Joseph Carter wrote:
> a tech ctte chair who's openly against the
> proposal to the point of trying to undermine it actively before it gets
> voted on
There's no evidence of that. Conspiracy theories are a bit childish.
Hamish
--
[First off, to avoid a bunch of silly posts: before responding to this
message, please catch up on reading debian-vote. If there's thirty or
so messages following this one it's pretty likely that what you want to
say in response has already been said. Thanks.]
On Mon, Oct 30, 2000 at 06:38:53PM
On Sat, Oct 28, 2000 at 09:40:52PM -0500, Joseph Carter wrote:
> a tech ctte chair who's openly against the
> proposal to the point of trying to undermine it actively before it gets
> voted on
There's no evidence of that. Conspiracy theories are a bit childish.
Hamish
-
34 matches
Mail list logo
