Draft ballot for the assets constitutional GR

[Manoj Srivastava]

Hi,

Note that this is a draft, voting is not yet open. Any
comments need to be in fast, though.

manoj

[MJ Ray]

Post by Manoj Srivastava
Note that this is a draft, voting is not yet open. Any
comments need to be in fast, though.

Could you name the amendment on the ballot, please?
"Amend the constitution" is not descriptive enough.

Thanks,

[Don Armstrong]

Post by Manoj Srivastava
Note that this is a draft, voting is not yet open. Any
comments need to be in fast, though.

Could you name the amendment on the ballot, please? "Amend the
constitution" is not descriptive enough.

It's a not so subtle ploy by the Secretary to force people to actually
read the amendment instead of voting on a soundbite...


Don Armstrong

[Manoj Srivastava]

Note that this is a draft, voting is not yet open. Any comments
need to be in fast, though.

Could you name the amendment on the ballot, please? "Amend the
constitution" is not descriptive enough.

Since there is only one issue where voting is open, anyone who
can't figure out what is being voted upon probably should not be
voting. Especially since there was a link to the vote page.

Does anyone themselves have had problems figuring out what
this was all about, or is it merely hypotheticals?

[MJ Ray]

Post by Manoj Srivastava

Could you name the amendment on the ballot, please? "Amend the
constitution" is not descriptive enough.

Since there is only one issue where voting is open, anyone who
can't figure out what is being voted upon probably should not be
voting. Especially since there was a link to the vote page.

Previously, the proposal has been named on the ballot, such as:
http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2004/03/msg00003.html
http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2004/06/msg00004.html
and even when there's only one option:
http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2003/06/msg00004.html

Also, if there is no material from the proposal in the ballot, how do
the wordings "consequently" decide the form of it? (constitution A.2.3)

Finally, if comments are unwelcome, why bother posting a draft ballot
with a message that suggests it's OK to comment?

Thanks,

[Manoj Srivastava]

Post by MJ Ray
http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2004/03/msg00003.html

Very short proposal, so full text was on the ballot as
well. Also, more than a up/down vote.

Post by MJ Ray
http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2004/06/msg00004.html

The full text does not seem to be present on this one -- but
there were multiple options, so needed names to disambiguate.

Post by MJ Ray
http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2003/06/msg00004.html
Also, if there is no material from the proposal in the ballot, how
do the wordings "consequently" decide the form of it? (constitution
A.2.3)

However, the final decision on the form of ballot(s) is the
Secretary's

Apparently, the proposer and the secretary both felt that the
form on the ballot was OK -- or do you have a better idea what the
proposer of the GR wanted?

Post by MJ Ray
Finally, if comments are unwelcome, why bother posting a draft
ballot with a message that suggests it's OK to comment?

I never said comments were not welcome. I also never said I'd
blindly agree to whatever people commented.

manoj

[MJ Ray]

Post by Manoj Srivastava
Apparently, the proposer and the secretary both felt that the
form on the ballot was OK -- or do you have a better idea what the
proposer of the GR wanted? [...]

If only the proposer and secretary need to be happy with the ballot,
post the draft to them only and sod the voters.

Post by Manoj Srivastava
I never said comments were not welcome. [...]

It seemed pretty clear from the response.

Thanks,

[Nathanael Nerode]

Post by Manoj Srivastava

Note that this is a draft, voting is not yet open. Any comments
need to be in fast, though.

Could you name the amendment on the ballot, please? "Amend the
constitution" is not descriptive enough.

Since there is only one issue where voting is open, anyone who
can't figure out what is being voted upon probably should not be
voting. Especially since there was a link to the vote page.
Does anyone themselves have had problems figuring out what
this was all about, or is it merely hypotheticals?

It was pretty clear, but "Amend the Constitution (assets handling)" would
have been better. Just in case someone mixed this up with some other
constitutional amendment.

[Manoj Srivastava]

Note that this is a draft, voting is not yet open. Any comments
need to be in fast, though.

Could you name the amendment on the ballot, please? "Amend the
constitution" is not descriptive enough.

Since there is only one issue where voting is open, anyone who
can't figure out what is being voted upon probably should not be
voting.

Does anyone themselves have had problems figuring out what
this was all about, or is it merely hypotheticals?

manoj