On Tue, 27 May 2003 22:25:32 +0200, Matthias Urlichs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Hi, > Sam Hartman wrote: >> And if you proposed a new name for it that accurately characterized >> what it was and removed some confusion, I might second such a >> proposal. I might also decide it wasn't worth the bother. > "Approvals". > I think that word works well; we already have established that > ranking an option WRT the default option is equivalent to checking > (or not) that option on an approval ballot. > There's not much difference between adding a sentence which states > that the word "quorum", as used in the proposal / the constitution, > is not used with its commonly-accepted meaning, and defining our > usage of the word "approvals". s/quorum/minimum threshold for approval/g ? How do the other sponsors feel about this? manoj -- Comparing information and knowledge is like asking whether the fatness of a pig is more or less green than the designated hitter rule." David Guaspari Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/> 1024R/C7261095 print CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E 1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C