Re: GRs, irrelevant amendments, and insincere voting

2003-11-06 Thread Chad Walstrom
On Thu, Nov 06, 2003 at 03:00:08PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote: > That you're sincerely disappointed in the outcome of the last GR > doesn't indicate a flaw in the system though -- pretty much every time > we have two options on the ballot, *someone* is going to be > disappointed. You're associatin

Re: RFD: amendment of Debian Social Contract

2003-11-06 Thread Peter Makholm
Anthony Towns writes: >> >> It's a distinction >> >> I'm not surprised that not everybody see but it is important to me. >> > Mmm. You're very special. >> No, I'm not. > > Mmm. I thought you just said you saw something that other people didn't? > Surely that makes you special? I said that it do

Re: RFD: amendment of Debian Social Contract

2003-11-06 Thread Anthony Towns
On Thu, Nov 06, 2003 at 09:17:18AM +0100, Peter Makholm wrote: > >> It might be a cultural issue but it is, for me, perfectly > >> sane to say: > >> 1. This is what I believe. > > "That Debian should be 100% free" ? Is that what you believe or not? It's what the proposed social contract says. I

PRIZE????

2003-11-06 Thread EVEYLN BERWICK
What prize

Re: RFD: amendment of Debian Social Contract

2003-11-06 Thread Andrew Suffield
On Sun, Nov 02, 2003 at 04:24:20PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote: > On Sat, Nov 01, 2003 at 08:53:40PM -0800, Benj. Mako Hill wrote: > > The archive admins still need to answer to the project. If they > > weren't barred from removing non-free right away (which may or may not > > be case with the propo

Re: RFD: amendment of Debian Social Contract

2003-11-06 Thread Roland Stigge
On Wed, Oct 29, 2003 at 04:25:28PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote: > [Please direct followups to debian-vote.] > > Now that the vote over the meaning of clause 4.1.5 of the Debian > Constitution is drawing to a close, the time is ripe to clear the last > bit of pending business from the discussions

Re: RFD: amendment of Debian Social Contract

2003-11-06 Thread Steve Langasek
[digression; nothing about voting or the current GR here, just a question about the real reasons that non-free is languishing today.] On Wed, Nov 05, 2003 at 05:23:43PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote: > Second, our users still aren't able to do everything they might like > to with free software; they

Re: RFD: amendment of Debian Social Contract

2003-11-06 Thread Anthony Towns
On Thu, Nov 06, 2003 at 07:46:27PM +, Andrew Suffield wrote: > To distinguish between modification of the social contract, and > removal of non-free; the latter vote should immediately follow the > former (once we know what the ballot will look like for the first, we > can write the second). Th

Re: RFD: amendment of Debian Social Contract

2003-11-06 Thread Anthony Towns
On Thu, Nov 06, 2003 at 06:22:40PM -0600, Steve Langasek wrote: > On Wed, Nov 05, 2003 at 05:23:43PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote: > > Second, our users still aren't able to do everything they might like > > to with free software; they can't play Flash games, they can't look > > at Quicktime movies,

Re: GRs, irrelevant amendments, and insincere voting

2003-11-06 Thread Chad Walstrom
On Thu, Nov 06, 2003 at 03:00:08PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote: > That you're sincerely disappointed in the outcome of the last GR > doesn't indicate a flaw in the system though -- pretty much every time > we have two options on the ballot, *someone* is going to be > disappointed. You're associatin

Re: RFD: amendment of Debian Social Contract

2003-11-06 Thread Peter Makholm
Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> >> It's a distinction >> >> I'm not surprised that not everybody see but it is important to me. >> > Mmm. You're very special. >> No, I'm not. > > Mmm. I thought you just said you saw something that other people didn't? > Surely that makes you special?

Re: RFD: amendment of Debian Social Contract

2003-11-06 Thread Anthony Towns
On Thu, Nov 06, 2003 at 09:17:18AM +0100, Peter Makholm wrote: > >> It might be a cultural issue but it is, for me, perfectly > >> sane to say: > >> 1. This is what I believe. > > "That Debian should be 100% free" ? Is that what you believe or not? It's what the proposed social contract says. I

PRIZE????

2003-11-06 Thread EVEYLN BERWICK
What prize

Re: RFD: amendment of Debian Social Contract

2003-11-06 Thread Andrew Suffield
On Sun, Nov 02, 2003 at 04:24:20PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote: > On Sat, Nov 01, 2003 at 08:53:40PM -0800, Benj. Mako Hill wrote: > > The archive admins still need to answer to the project. If they > > weren't barred from removing non-free right away (which may or may not > > be case with the propo

Re: RFD: amendment of Debian Social Contract

2003-11-06 Thread Roland Stigge
On Wed, Oct 29, 2003 at 04:25:28PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote: > [Please direct followups to debian-vote.] > > Now that the vote over the meaning of clause 4.1.5 of the Debian > Constitution is drawing to a close, the time is ripe to clear the last > bit of pending business from the discussions

Re: RFD: amendment of Debian Social Contract

2003-11-06 Thread Steve Langasek
[digression; nothing about voting or the current GR here, just a question about the real reasons that non-free is languishing today.] On Wed, Nov 05, 2003 at 05:23:43PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote: > Second, our users still aren't able to do everything they might like > to with free software; they

Re: RFD: amendment of Debian Social Contract

2003-11-06 Thread Anthony Towns
On Thu, Nov 06, 2003 at 06:22:40PM -0600, Steve Langasek wrote: > On Wed, Nov 05, 2003 at 05:23:43PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote: > > Second, our users still aren't able to do everything they might like > > to with free software; they can't play Flash games, they can't look > > at Quicktime movies,

Re: RFD: amendment of Debian Social Contract

2003-11-06 Thread Anthony Towns
On Thu, Nov 06, 2003 at 07:46:27PM +, Andrew Suffield wrote: > To distinguish between modification of the social contract, and > removal of non-free; the latter vote should immediately follow the > former (once we know what the ballot will look like for the first, we > can write the second). Th