On 03/10/2015 05:32 PM, hellekin wrote: > On 03/10/15 11:57, Steve Litt wrote: >>> I agree with you that Devuan governance needs to differ from Debian's, >>> and that is must consider the general interest as well as respect the >>> particular. >> >> LOL >> > *** Can you expand the acronym? I'm not sure I find anything funny here. > > == > hk > Irony is a form of humor... and it is ironic that the most democratic freedom (to vote away the principles) results in the most non-free end result (total lock in and ignoring users). It would be funnier if it wasn't pathetic.
Democracy is a very delicate system, and a constitution with missing points, or that can be changed later by a future corrupt government, doesn't solve it completely. So to address the missing points, the draft says "9.10 Software must not encourage lock-in", which is exactly what we were missing, and I'm happy to see that there... but there is always something else we can't predict that is also missing. I was hoping to see some insight in there, for example in the "4. Decision-making bodies and individuals" section. And especially hope it doesn't say anything like "anyone can join en masse and override all the decisions completely overnight". _______________________________________________ Dng mailing list [email protected] https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
