Re: An ammendment (Re: Formal CFV: General Resolution to Abolish Non-Free)

2000-06-11 Thread Anthony Towns
On Sat, Jun 10, 2000 at 03:30:04PM -0500, John Goerzen wrote: > Anthony Towns writes: > > 1) the Debian project continues to acknowledge the utility of providing > > non-free software for it users. > What do we need a GR for this? What makes you think that there is > utility in us actually

Re: An ammendment (Re: Formal CFV: General Resolution to Abolish Non-Free)

2000-06-11 Thread Anthony Towns
On Sat, Jun 10, 2000 at 11:45:32PM -0500, Chris Lawrence wrote: > On Jun 11, Anthony Towns wrote: > > As I understand it, at this point two votes need to take place: one to > > determine what form the resolution should take so that developers may > > choose between John's original resolution, or th

Re: Removing non-free - reality check.

2000-06-11 Thread Taketoshi Sano
Hi. (I remove -devel list as well as the address of Ch.Troestler from cc of this mail. I considered to remove also the address of John, but left it since I don't know if he read -project list. I left -vote list also, since this topic is related to coming vote.) In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, a

Re: Removing non-free - reality check.

2000-06-11 Thread Peter Makholm
Taketoshi Sano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Softwares which no one needs will self-demise, without intervention. > Persecution will make Martyrs, and it will make difficult to enlighten > people about the value of the Free Software. Nice said. -- Peter

Re: An ammendment (Re: Formal CFV: General Resolution to Abolish Non-Free)

2000-06-11 Thread Norman Petry
On Sat, June 10, 2000 10:00 PM, Branden Robinson wrote: > >On Sat, Jun 10, 2000 at 09:53:40PM -0500, Chris Lawrence wrote: >> Now follows a dissertation on the voting system: >[...] > >Thanks for the primer; this was quite possibly the most useful message in >this entire thread. > Except that Chr

It isn't quite Condorcet's method.

2000-06-11 Thread MIKE OSSIPOFF
First, about how to treat short rankings, if you've ranked X and you haven't ranked Y, then it's reasonable to say that you've ranked X over Y. I hope that's how that's interpreted in the debian count rules. The rank-counting procedure now in use by debian carries out Condorcet's suggestion that

Re: Removing non-free - reality check.

2000-06-11 Thread Taketoshi Sano
Hi. (I remove -devel list as well as the address of Ch.Troestler from cc of this mail. I considered to remove also the address of John, but left it since I don't know if he read -project list. I left -vote list also, since this topic is related to coming vote.) In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,

Re: Removing non-free - reality check.

2000-06-11 Thread Peter Makholm
Taketoshi Sano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Softwares which no one needs will self-demise, without intervention. > Persecution will make Martyrs, and it will make difficult to enlighten > people about the value of the Free Software. Nice said. -- Peter -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL P

Re: An ammendment (Re: Formal CFV: General Resolution to Abolish Non-Free)

2000-06-11 Thread Norman Petry
On Sat, June 10, 2000 10:00 PM, Branden Robinson wrote: > >On Sat, Jun 10, 2000 at 09:53:40PM -0500, Chris Lawrence wrote: >> Now follows a dissertation on the voting system: >[...] > >Thanks for the primer; this was quite possibly the most useful message in >this entire thread. > Except that Ch

It isn't quite Condorcet's method.

2000-06-11 Thread MIKE OSSIPOFF
First, about how to treat short rankings, if you've ranked X and you haven't ranked Y, then it's reasonable to say that you've ranked X over Y. I hope that's how that's interpreted in the debian count rules. The rank-counting procedure now in use by debian carries out Condorcet's suggestion that