.
Sorry!]
0:
https://salsa.debian.org/debian/tech-ctte/-/blob/master/resolved_issues/893200_TC_Chair_election/run_vote.sh
1:
https://salsa.debian.org/debian/tech-ctte/-/blame/master/scripts/pocket-devotee?ref_type=heads#L198
--
Don Armstrong https://www.donarmstrong.com
I sta
lumbing around these systems is complicated;
I'd certainly love to see a solution which has a larger community
contributing to it.
--
Don Armstrong https://www.donarmstrong.com
Fate and Temperament are two words for one and the same concept.
-- Novalis [Hermann Hesse _Demian_]
/9bbc20fed6881fa5b239830cad0939b979bbe300
Rationale: e-mail should continue to be an option for casting votes even
while alternative methods of casting ballots might also be allowed.
--
Don Armstrong https://www.donarmstrong.com
We cast this message into the cosmos. [...] We are trying to survive
cifically at me, so I
might be minimizing the real fear people have because I personally
haven't experienced it.
Perhaps the compromise position is to default to secret ballots, but
allow people to automatically unmask their preference at the appropriate
time. [Totally not supported by devotee
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022, Sam Hartman wrote:
> >>>>> "Don" == Don Armstrong writes:
> Don> If we make all votes secret we should require that the voting
> Don> system used enables voters to validate that their vote was
> Don> correctly
project. I also think the
large number of voters masks the impact of a single individual vote.
[But maybe this is a personal safety issue? Perhaps people should be
able to optionally mask their identity when voting? Not sure.]
1: Where someone can take each individual vote and calculate the re
ty to
overrule the secretary isn't enough to always have the desired effect if
§4.1.7 isn't also modified accordingly.
That said, if a majority uses the blunt force of §4.1.7 to try to get
its way by removing people, I'd be more concerned about the health of
the project t
§4.1.8 and §4.1.7 should be
addressed when it comes to questions requiring a supermajority.
--
Don Armstrong https://www.donarmstrong.com
No matter how many instances of white swans we may have observed, this
does not justify the conclusion that all swans are white.
--
ggest that the ballot option be
specified as a wdiff to the existing constitution?
Whoever has to modify the constitution at the end of this vote will
likely appreciate it.
--
Don Armstrong https://www.donarmstrong.com
He was wrong. Nature abhors dimensional abnormalities,
dgement."
Not to say that there aren't voters who are confused, but you should
contact them to figure out why they voted the way they did before
assuming that they didn't know what they were doing.
--
Don Armstrong https://www.donarmstrong.com
Whatever you do will be insignificant, but it is very important that
you do it.
-- Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi
On Wed, 10 Aug 2016, Micha Lenk wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 09, 2016 at 02:33:34PM -0700, Don Armstrong wrote on the
> debian-private list:
> > You're being very rude to every DD who participated in the discussion on
> > -vote, the secretary, and myself by claiming that we inte
On Mon, 08 Aug 2016, Bart Martens wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 08, 2016 at 09:58:45AM -0500, Don Armstrong wrote:
> > On Sun, 07 Aug 2016, Micha Lenk wrote:
> > > That would establishing some kind of "ex post facto" law (which by the
> > > way is prohibited in ma
the list masters.
This is why the GR text requires that at minimum DDs can object via GR.
--
Don Armstrong https://www.donarmstrong.com
Your absence has gone through me
Like thread through a needle.
Everything I do is stitched with its color.
-- W. S. Merwin "Poetry in Motion" p107
On Mon, 18 Jul 2016, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 17, 2016 at 05:56:12PM -0700, Don Armstrong wrote:
> > In response to the helpful comments, I've modified my proposed amendment
> > to Nicolas's resolution by adding "at minimum", and now propose the
> &g
and
opportunity for Debian Developers to object by GR prior to
declassification.
3. In keeping with paragraph 3 of the Debian Social Contract, Debian
Developers are strongly encouraged to use the debian-private mailing
list only for discussions that should not be disclosed.
=== END
declassify excerpts of -private of historical
interest by any process which [+ at minimum +] provides sufficient
opportunity for
Debian Developers to object by GR prior to declassification.
communicates this more effectively and addresses that concern?
--
Don Armstrong
ian Social Contract, Debian
Developers are strongly encouraged to use the debian-private mailing
list only for discussions that should not be disclosed.
=== END GR TEXT ===
--
Don Armstrong https://www.donarmstrong.com
Our days are precious, but we gladly see them going
I
On Thu, 07 Jul 2016, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Don Armstrong writes:
>
> > I have no problem acknowledging that we haven't been able to implement
> > the existing GR, but I don't see the utility of voting to remove the
> > possibility of ever implementing it
y to change at any point in the future.
2. In keeping with paragraph 3 of the Debian Social Contract, Debian
Developers are strongly encouraged to use the debian-private mailing
list only for discussions that should not be disclosed.
=== END GR TEXT ===
--
Don Armstrong
Fix duplicate section numbering.
>
>The current Debian Constitution has two sections numbered A.1.
>This does not currently give rise to any ambiguity but it is
>undesirable.
>
>Fix this with the following semantically neutral amendment:
>
> - Renumber
uld.
This isn't usually an issue in general votes, but is a problem on the
CTTE.
--
Don Armstrong http://www.donarmstrong.com
I'm sorry about those late night emails.
I only said those things because I was too drunk
to be afraid.
-- a softer world #579
http://www.asofterworld.com/index.php?id=579
ing to ask people about this myself, but
haven't had time.
--
Don Armstrong http://www.donarmstrong.com
Fate and Temperament are two words for one and the same concept.
-- Novalis [Hermann Hesse _Demian_]
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.o
to serve on the TC with, had they been interested in serving.
--
Don Armstrong http://www.donarmstrong.com
J.W. Grant: "Bastard!"
Rico: "Yes, Sir. In my case, an accident of birth. But you, Sir,
you're a self-made man."
-- Henry "Rico" Far
On Thu, 04 Dec 2014, Michael Gilbert wrote:
> Doesn't that require constitutional change? The current powers as
> written make the TC a decision-making body, not a mediation body.
Not really, because it doesn't take any constitutional powers to
try to mediate.
-
reason to use an odd number is to avoid having to use the
casting vote in the CTTE. Considering that we've used the casting vote
exactly once in the entire history of Debian, I'm not sure that
including this is worth the effort if even one person disagrees.
--
Don Armstrong
recommend new member(s) to the Project Leader, who may choose
(individually) to appoint them or not.
3. When there are 5 members or fewer the Technical Committee may
--
2.1.1
But if this is at all controversial, then we can put this forward later.
--
Don Armstrong
collab-maint/debian-ctte.git/commit/?id=7a0009d350d57b89aa848f4d66a0b40959893373
--
Don Armstrong http://www.donarmstrong.com
If you have the slightest bit of intellectual integrity you cannot
support the government. -- anonymous
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.de
n wml suitable for direct inclusion
in the appropriate vote_nnn.wml file.
I don't think it's necessary to actually amend the constitution to do
this, because it's just something that we can do.
--
Don Armstrong http://www.donarmstrong.com
Religion is religion, how
oice 4: Amendment C
Choice 5: Further Discussion
and we can get on with the voting.
--
Don Armstrong http://www.donarmstrong.com
"People selling drug paraphernalia ... are as much a part of drug
trafficking as silencers are a part of criminal homicide."
-- John Br
; periods on debian-vote is problematic.
Right; that's what we seemed to agree on as well.
I think that we can all agree that we'd like a decision on this
amendment significantly before January 1st, which presumably means
having it formally proposed well before December 3rd.
--
Do
sult in a turnover of 1 or 2 members each year, whether by
> +resignation or term expiry, while allowing senior members to stay
> +on if a junior member resigns.
> +
>
There was also some discussion of this during the CTTE meeting too:
http://meetbot.debian.
evented me from even starting...
--
Don Armstrong http://www.donarmstrong.com
Religion is religion, however you wrap it, and like Quell says, a
preoccupation with the next world clearly signals an inability to cope
credibly with this one.
-- Richard K. Morgan "Br
time. We certainly can publish bans on -private, and I'm OK
with there being review after the fact if necessary, but I'm not
personally going to waste my limited time with a burdensome bureaucratic
procedure to actually put the ban in place in the first case.
--
Don Armstrong
individual
concerned, and warns them about it specifically, and informs the
reporter that their concern has been addressed. In the case where
owner@ or listmaster@ have made a decision which can be overridden by
GR (IE, banning someone from using control@ or similar), -private is
notified so DDs are
to exactly the
same period we have now.]
Don Armstrong
--
Everyone has to die. And in a hundred years nobody's going to inquire
just how most people died. The best thing is to do it in the way that
strikes your fancy most.
-- Kenzaburō Ōe _Silent Cry_ p5
http://www.donarmstrong.com
rebuttal on the appropriate vote page. [Or just link to the
appropriate point in the -vote archives where the rationale and
rebuttal were posted.]
Don Armstrong
--
LEADERSHIP -- A form of self-preservation exhibited by people with
autodestructive imaginations in order to ensure that when it comes to
t
1.6. [Though one of these days, we probably
should fix up A.1; it's language doesn't properly promote amendments
to resolutions (options?) to be voted on.]
Don Armstrong
--
The sheer ponderousness of the panel's opinion [...] refutes its
thesis far more convincingly than anything I
my reaction upon seeing
> the ballot is always to vote right away.
Probably it'd be enough to send the preliminary ballot to -vote, with
an appropriate reply-to set[1], but just reject any messages to the
address. When the voting period starts, send the final ballot to
-announce using
over all of the decisions that the CTTE takes,
including membership in the CTTE.
Don Armstrong
--
NASCAR is a Yankee conspiracy to keep you all placated so the South
won't rise again.
-- http://www.questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=327
http://www.donarmstrong.com
27;s fairly trivial to
file a bug asking for it (and someone who has a better idea than I do
right this second of where it should go could even prepare and/or
commit a patch.
Don Armstrong
--
She was alot like starbucks.
IE, generic and expensive.
-- hugh macleod http://www.gapingvoid
e to get it whipped up into shape, I'd appreciate the
help.
[I had asked Steve about this in Argentina, and he was supportive, but
unfortunatly I haven't done anything more about it since then.]
Don Armstrong
--
This message brought to you by weapons of mass destruction rel
ng,[0] I once again will refrain
from running a Debate on IRC.[1]
Don Armstrong
0: Significant clamoring would probably involve someone stepping up
to help, too.
1: Considering that there's only one self nomination, and we're within
48 hours of the gate, this message may be moot, anywa
On Fri, 01 May 2009, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> On Fri, May 01 2009, Don Armstrong wrote:
> > Only as binding as we as a group consider them to be.
>
> Hmm. Certainly puts the social contract in a new light, though.
It really shouldn't; as a group we decide whether we&#x
t their duties (though they can of course be
overridden by GR.)
Don Armstrong
1: Fundamentally though, I find the whole process of making position
statements about the foundation documents tedious. If you think the
documents meaning is unclear, propose amendments to the documents to
make them cl
or the constitution.
Developers can ignore (or follow) such statements as they wish.
Furthermore, the statements must be non-technical.
Don Armstrong
--
Filing a bug is probably not going to get it fixed any faster.
-- Anthony Towns
http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu
--
T
e From, Date, and Subject fields.
You can already get this with
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?correspondent=lu...@lucas-nussbaum.net
(or the appropriate Debbugs::SOAP::get_bugs(correspondent=>'foo');
call, or bts select correspondent:lu...@lucas-nussbaum.net)
Don Ar
On Sat, 21 Mar 2009, Don Armstrong wrote:
> I'm going to make suggestions for changes to both proposals here; just
> change 2*floor(Q) to floor(Q) for the second alternative. Note that
> I've switched from floor(2Q) to 2*floor(Q); this changes the majority
> requirements f
need not be an integer and is not rounded.
e) §4.2 is renumbered to remain in sequence.
Don Armstrong
--
Vimes hated and despised the privileges of rank, but they had this to
be said for them: At least they meant that you could hate and despise
them in comfort.
-- Terry Pratchett _The Fifth Elephan
hem to engage each other on #debian-devel on an
ad-hoc basis about the specific questions that bother you
specifically, without having to wait for the rigamarole of an IRC
debate.
Don Armstrong
--
"People selling drug paraphernalia ... are as much a part of drug
trafficking as silencers a
't set up a poll, I'll send another message asking for
DDs to privately mail me (or maybe me-too to -vote) if they find the
debates useful.
Don Armstrong
--
"I was thinking seven figures," he said, "but I would have taken a
hundred grand. I'm not a greedy person.&
t year's debate
format[1] if you've forgotten what we did last year, suffer from
amnesia or are incapable of forming long term memories or faking them
by the creative use of google and blogs).
People who'd like to help run the debate and/or collect questions can
also volunteer with
that will pass the FD majority
hurdle, people who actually prefer those options to FD will second
them, and will easily be able to meet K, and should be able to meet Q
or 2Q.
Don Armstrong
--
Science is a way of trying not to fool yourself. The first principle
is that you must not fool your
ject, with no options that are only acceptable to small parts
of the project.
Don Armstrong
--
The attackers hadn't simply robbed the bank. They had carried off
everything portable, including the security cameras, the carpets, the
chairs, and the light and plumbing fixtures. The conspirators had
ranking FD above an option is to
indicate that you don't find a specific option an acceptable solution
at all, and would rather have futher discussion than accepting it.
Don Armstrong
--
Of course, there are cases where only a rare individual will have the
vision to perceive a system whic
e support it for it
to have a chance of being supported by a majority of people in an
election that meets quorum.
Don Armstrong
1: 102 subscriptions with @debian.org$ addresses, anyway. (For
comparison, there are 147 subscribed to -devel, 112 to -project, and
324 to d-d-a.) I've no clue about
On Tue, 30 Dec 2008, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 29, 2008 at 04:18:02PM -0800, Don Armstrong wrote:
> > 1: I'd be happier, though, if those proposing and seconding options
> > would be more careful about the effects that their options may have,
> > and be more
On Tue, 30 Dec 2008, Guido Trotter wrote:
> Well, let's say you should not propose or second an option you don't
> plan to rank above "further discussion".
I agree. "Rank first" is a bit absolutist; "Rank highly" is more
appropriate, and what I used
;t offer suggestions for
improvements in options that you don't agree with; you just shouldn't
propose or second them. [If it's popular enough to be a useful option,
the people with whom the option is popular will propose and second;
it's not like it's hard to do.]
Don Armstrong
d mean that any option will have enough
voters to conceivably win in an election. [I would also be ok with
K==1.5Q, and requiring at least K developers for each step.]
All that said, I'd be interested in seeing such a change made.[1]
Don Armstrong
1: I'd be happier, though, if those prop
(or however many architectures need non-free
firmware) wouldn't be a huge deal for our cdimage mirrors.
Ideally, such a CD would be marked as "unofficial" or similar to
indicate that it contains non-free firmware, but it could be linked
and distributed as normal.
Don Armstrong
1:
ould seriously hope that anyone who has voting rights in
Debian is fully capable of completely ignoring the title of the ballot
option and actually reading the text of the issue under discussion, as
no ballot title can possibly convey the entirety of the issue under
discussion nor the portions of
less cheaper than the procedure
for submitting a GR itself. People seconding and/or submitting
proposals/amendments should only do so for amendments that they
support, and should withdraw their proposal or second for amendments
which they no longer support.
Don Armstrong
--
THERE IS NO GRAVITY THE W
On Tue, 01 Apr 2008, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote:
> On Tuesday 1 April 2008 00:18, Don Armstrong wrote:
> > I agree that the stable security team should no longer be responsible
> > for the wordpress package,[1]
> [...]
> > 1: Though I must admit that it's
directory traversal via "..", and arbitrary file modification
> CVE-2007-1599, CVE-2007-3639 redirect authenticated users to other sites
> and obtain potentially sensative information
Yuck.
On Mon, 31 Mar 2008, Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote:
> Don Armstrong wrote:
> > The package in qu
laimed that he would do exactly this. According to the
list of open bugs that I can see, the security issues that are
currently affecting the stable version are supposedly minor. [If
they're not, someone who knows more about the CVEs in question that I
do should file more bugs and/or adj
1]
As near as I can gather, it appears that so far no one feels to have
the power necessary to change how account creation and key
modification actually works.
What do the DPL candidates feel about this? Do we require a GR to
direct how account creation and keyring management is to be handled?
D
ple who are validly on VAC, but presumably
someone on VAC should arrange for an active CTTE member to handle
issues while they are away.
[The times above are just first stabs; I'm not attached to them by any
means.]
Don Armstrong
--
Mozart tells us what it's like to be human, Beethov
http://svn.donarmstrong.com/don/trunk/projects/debian/dpl_debates/debate_rules_public.txt
Don Armstrong
--
She was alot like starbucks.
IE, generic and expensive.
-- hugh macleod http://www.gapingvoid.com/Moveable_Type/archives/001376.html
http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rz
to at least some
degree, so this isn't terribly convincing to me.
Don Armstrong
--
It has always been Debian's philosophy in the past to stick to what
makes sense, regardless of what crack the rest of the universe is
smoking.
-- Andrew Suffield in [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.do
. So even though the stated requirement is
"more than 1/2", the actual requirement is "at least 4/6th". The
difference is 1/6th of the votes, or 16 2/3%. In other words, due to
the small sample, the requirement is more than 16% higher than
intended.
[Wonderous how the numbers wo
dded in which can be used as a buffer zone in case the nomination
period and/or voting period needs to be extended.
Don Armstrong
--
If you find it impossible to believe that the universe didn't have a
creator, why don't you find it impossible that your creator didn'
sit is allowing enough time for nominees
to post position statements and to have enough time for those position
statements digested by the electorate, and enough initial discussion
to occur so that interesting questions can be found for the debate. If
candidates don't have these ready at the be
the reasons why incumbant DPLs have a hard time
getting re-elected.
I've no real problem with failing to re-elect in these cases.
Don Armstrong
--
The major difference between a thing that might go wrong and a thing
that cannot possibly go wrong is that when a thing that cannot
possi
ul for continuity and/or cases where the
nomination period must be extended (though it leads to a short lame
duck period).
Don Armstrong
--
When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall one
by one, an unpitied sacrifice in a contemptible struggle.
-- Edmund Burke "Thoughts on t
On Thu, 26 Jul 2007, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 26, 2007 at 11:00:14PM -0700, Don Armstrong wrote:
> > I agree as well, but it's all that we require DDs to subscribe to.
> > [That said, we really should work to make d-d-a enough; decisions that
> > and transi
there.]
Frankly, there's nothing stoping us from recommending/requiring DMs to
be active/subscribed to other lists too; we just have to do it.
Don Armstrong
--
Nothing is as inevitable as a mistake whose time has come.
-- Tussman's Law
http://www.donarmstrong.com http
intainers to upload their own packages
without being a DD isn't an attempt to improve the NM process; it's an
attempt to allow people to contribute who may not actually want to
become DDs. Under Antony's proposal, NMs can become DMs at any point
that their AM feels they are ready
but getting
DDs to agree to the process and comment on it is a healthy way
forward.
Don Armstrong
--
For a moment, nothing happened. Then, after a second or so, nothing
continued to happen.
-- Douglas Adams
http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu
--
To UNSUBS
that at least one Debian developer (preferable more) is willing
> to advocate for the applicant's inclusion, in particular to the
> fact that the applicant is technically competent and good to work
> with.
Do the people who are going to be involved in maintaining the ke
On Thu, 31 May 2007, Brian May wrote:
> Is it possible to act as a developer without mailing list access?
Yes, just as it's possible to act as a developer if you've been
excluded from using [EMAIL PROTECTED]; you just have to use an
intermediate who can send on messages on your
d group of trolls. I don't know if Mathew
Garrett's allegations are true or not, but their implications for the
trustworthiness of our DPL if true are troubling.
Don Armstrong
--
No amount of force can control a free man, a man whose mind is free
[...] You can't conquer a free
On Fri, 20 Apr 2007, Ben Finney wrote:
> Don Armstrong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > On Thu, 19 Apr 2007, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
> > > How about: "There is a special exception for the texts of the
> > > licenses under which works in Debian are distributed;&
rk in Debian is being
distributed. [IE, in debian/copyright or specifically included by
reference from there.]
For example, a second copy of the GPL in a package under the GPL would
not be acceptable, nor would a copy of the GPL in a package not under
the GPL.
Don Armstrong
--
An elephant: A mous
tly proposed amendment does not disambiguate
between license texts in their capacity as a license under which a
work is distribute and random text which is labelled as a license.
Don Armstrong
1: http://lists.debian.org/debian-vote/2004/01/msg01307.html
--
All bad precedents began as justifiable
not clear to me how you'd express ranking options equally.
Don Armstrong
--
S: Make me a sandwich
B: What? Make it yourself.
S: sudo make me a sandwich
B: Okay.
-- xkcd http://xkcd.com/c149.html
http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMA
them to me (the sooner the better).
See
http://svn.donarmstrong.com/don/trunk/projects/debian/dpl_debates/debate_rules_public.txt
or the previous announcement if you want more information.
Don Armstrong
--
NASCAR is a Yankee conspiracy to keep you all placated so the South
won't
losing statements will be pasted to the IRC channel starting no later
than 00:40 UTC.
Logs from all of the channels involved will be made publicly available
after the debate for reference by voters and other interested
individuals.
Don Armstrong
--
This can't be happening to me. I've g
Barring any serious last minute objections[1] the DPL Debate will be
held in #debian-dpl-debate on irc.debian.org (OFTC) at 21:30 UTC on
Saturday March 10th, 2007, ending around 00:30 UTC on the 11th.
I'll be making an announcement shortly to -announce reiterating the
debate rules.
On Tue, 27 Feb 2007, Julien Cristau wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 26, 2007 at 18:03:19 -0800, Don Armstrong wrote:
>
> > Most of the candidates have responded to my requests for scheduling
> > information, but:
> >
> > Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> I gues
On Sat, 24 Feb 2007, Don Armstrong wrote:
> I'd like to make a decision on the time for the debate within the
> next few days, so if you have serious objections to either method,
> you need to make them known.
Most of the candidates have responded to my requests for scheduling
in
On Thu, 15 Feb 2007, Don Armstrong wrote:
> If you wish to volunteer, please e-mail me or contact me on IRC (I'm
> dondelelcaro).
So far (hopefully I haven't missed anyone) the volunteers I have are:
Neil McGovern (Maulkin)
David Nusinow (gravity)
Pete Nuttall (psn)
MJ Ray (slef)
hem.
http://svn.donarmstrong.com/don/trunk/projects/debian/dpl_debates/debate_rules_public.txt
are the rules that we used last year, but they are (of course) totally
open to revision. [The date and times will of course change depending
on the candidates availability.]
Don Armstrong
--
We were at a chinese res
m uploading binary packages which do not correspond to
the source which you have uploaded.
Don Armstrong
--
Where I sleep at night, is this important compared to what I read
during the day? What do you think defines me? Where I slept or what I
did all day?
-- Thomas Van Orden of Van Orden v.
ted discussion, the feared consequences of which
have failed to materialize at all.
Don Armstrong
--
In all matters of government, the correct answer is usually: "Do
nothing"
-- Robert Heinlein _Time Enough For Love_ p428
http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu
--
ourse of the discussion/resolution period.
Even if Manoj were to delegate the running of this vote to another
developer,[1] that developer would have to conduct an immediate vote
as well.
Don Armstrong
1: I don't see an issue with suggesting this just to avoid any
possibility of this kind o
at should be abundantly apparent to anyone who has been paying
attention. Regardless, it doesn't dismiss the crux of the argument:
baring competent legal advice to the contrary,[1] distributing
sourceless GPLed works is not clear of legal liability. Doing
otherwise may put ourselves and our mirr
priate, GR
or no GR, and opens up us and our mirror operators to a whole scope of
liability that they should not be facing.
Don Armstrong
1: We can argue about whether we actually "know" or "suspect" or
"feel", but once it's clear, there's no other choice. I
his stuff to multiple lists;
complaints about the form of the ballot belong on -vote.
Don Armstrong
--
Il semble que la perfection soit atteinte non quand il n'y a plus rien
a ajouter, mais quand il n'y a plus rien a retrancher.
(Perfection is apparently not achieved when nothing
ersus considering
what one wishes it said, there's not much I can do to help.]
Don Armstrong
--
The sheer ponderousness of the panel's opinion ... refutes its thesis
far more convincingly than anything I might say. The panel's labored
effort to smother the Second Amendment by she
On Sun, 08 Oct 2006, Francesco Poli wrote:
> On Sat, 7 Oct 2006 23:04:21 -0700 Don Armstrong wrote:
> > Thus, the proposal very carefully walks the line that the DFSG
> > currently walks. Whether the DFSG should apply to all works (or
> > just some work) is an open question, a
1 - 100 of 213 matches
Mail list logo
