On Tue, Mar 06, 2007 at 12:16:34PM +0000, Ian Jackson wrote: > I didn't want to make this personal, but [...]
I think the phrase you're looking for is "so I won't". > Anthony Towns writes: > > And, uh, the "authoritative decisionmaker" for Debian is the duly elected > > leader of the Debian project. > Anthony overreaches himself here. "Authoritative decisionmaker" is an SPI-specific term, that IMO, doesn't reflect the role at all well, whether in relation to Debian, or other SPI related projects. That's why I referred to it in scare quotes above, and don't use it regarding the role by preference. > IMO this is not the first time he has overstepped the mark; on another > memorable recent occasion, after an enormously acrimonious debate, 15% > of Debian's governing body thought he had offended badly enough that > he should be sacked over it[1], as many as endorsed his actual > decision[2]. > [1] http://www.debian.org/vote/2006/vote_005 > Of 330 DD's who cast ballots, 48 preferred Recall to the only > other option, Further Discussion. > > [2] http://www.debian.org/vote/2006/vote_006 > Of 333 DD's who cast ballots, 49 preferred `wish success to Dunc > Tank' to `do not endorse or support his other projects'. Those are different sets of numbers. In the first vote, 277 people voted FD, while 48 people voted for the recall, a difference of 229 votes. In the second vote, 177 people preferred "wish success", to "do not endorse/support", while 128 preferred the opposite, a difference of 49 votes. Cheers, aj
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ Spi-general mailing list Spi-general@lists.spi-inc.org http://lists.spi-inc.org/listinfo/spi-general
