----- "Steve Langasek" wrote: > Yes, because it's not a supersession of the Foundation Document; it's either > a position statement or an override of a decision by a delegate. Position > statements are not binding; overrides of delegates can only override > decisions that have actually been taken. Either way, if 50%+1 of the > project wants to order a project delegate to do something that contradicts > the Social Contract, there's no constitutional basis for having the > Secretary prevent them from doing so. *The Secretary is an officer of the > constitution, not of the Social Contract*.
Is now an inappropriate time to start a GR to formally recognize the Social Contract as a component of the constitution? The notion that the Social Contract (our purpose and motivation) is less binding that the Constitution (how we get things done) seems nonsensical in the extreme. -- Ean Schuessler, CTO Brainfood.com [email protected] - http://www.brainfood.com - 214-720-0700 x 315
