On Sat, Dec 09, 2000 at 07:43:57PM -0500, Raul Miller wrote:
Personally, I worry about any kind of wholesale change in the language
of the constitution. Yeah, if you change major chunks of the document
then current ambiguities would go away. But how do we know whether we're
introducing new
On Sat, Dec 09, 2000 at 07:43:57PM -0500, Raul Miller wrote:
Personally, I worry about any kind of wholesale change in the language
of the constitution. Yeah, if you change major chunks of the document
then current ambiguities would go away. But how do we know whether we're
introducing
On Sun, Dec 10, 2000 at 07:48:07AM -0500, Raul Miller wrote:
On Sun, Dec 10, 2000 at 08:16:13PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
It's not like your interpretation (of supermajorities in particular,
but also of cyclic tie-breaking) has ever actually been used before,
either within Debian or
On Sat, Dec 09, 2000 at 07:43:57PM -0500, Raul Miller wrote:
Personally, I worry about any kind of wholesale change in the language
of the constitution. Yeah, if you change major chunks of the document
then current ambiguities would go away. But how do we know whether we're
introducing new
On Sat, Dec 09, 2000 at 07:43:57PM -0500, Raul Miller wrote:
Personally, I worry about any kind of wholesale change in the language
of the constitution. Yeah, if you change major chunks of the document
then current ambiguities would go away. But how do we know whether we're
introducing
On Sun, Dec 10, 2000 at 07:48:07AM -0500, Raul Miller wrote:
On Sun, Dec 10, 2000 at 08:16:13PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
It's not like your interpretation (of supermajorities in particular,
but also of cyclic tie-breaking) has ever actually been used before,
either within Debian or
6 matches
Mail list logo
