On Sun, Dec 21, 2008 at 02:22:40PM +, Matthew Johnson wrote:
> On Sat Dec 20 17:51, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > On Sat, Dec 20, 2008 at 12:48:43PM +0200, Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho wrote:
> > > In my eyes, this argument applies to any situation where a supermajority
> > > might be formally required,
On Sun, Dec 21, 2008 at 03:38:55PM -0600, Ean Schuessler wrote:
> - "Steve Langasek" wrote:
> > Yes, I agree that supermajority requirements are a bad idea in
> > general.
> To understand the need for a supermajority all you have to do is look at
> American politics. A supermajority insures
On Sat, Dec 20, 2008 at 02:52:03PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
>
> As far as voting for a position statement along the lines of "the social
> contract doesn't matter, we'll upload Microsoft Word into main, yay!",
> I believe that would also require a simple majority (1:1) to pass,
What you're say
- "Steve Langasek" wrote:
> Yes, I agree that supermajority requirements are a bad idea in
> general.
To understand the need for a supermajority all you have to do is look at
American politics. A supermajority insures that a razor thin majority can't end
up doing something radically disagr
- "Anthony Towns" wrote:
> I consider being able to easily install Debian and get it running on
> whatever random hardware I buy an essential freedom, so I see most of
> this as people trying to take away my freedoms. Obviously, your mileage
> varies, but that doesn't make either of us popul
Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho dijo [Sat, Dec 20, 2008 at 12:51:39PM +0200]:
> On Sat, Dec 20, 2008 at 01:43:44PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > Politics is the art of making people who disagree with you look stupid
> > and immoral.
>
> Politics is, in my experience, the art of finding the compromise tha
Russ Allbery dijo [Fri, Dec 19, 2008 at 12:18:01PM -0800]:
> Some possible options for that body:
>
> * The DPL (advantage: most directly representative governance figure)
>
> * The Secretary (advantage: not directly representative and hence somewhat
> akin to a Supreme Court judge in the US le
On Sat Dec 20 17:51, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 20, 2008 at 12:48:43PM +0200, Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho wrote:
> > In my eyes, this argument applies to any situation where a supermajority
> > might be formally required, and in my opinion the corollary is that
> > supermajorities are a bad ide
Bdale Garbee dijo [Sat, Dec 20, 2008 at 08:59:19AM -0700]:
> The closing time specified in the original call for votes was in error,
> as the timing was supposed to be shortened for discussion periods but
> not the actual voting interval. Thus, I believe the vote in process
> should properly end a
9 matches
Mail list logo
