Re: [ga] Motion # 1

[t byfield <tbyfield@panix.com>]

ross@tucows.com (Fri 05/10/02 at 02:18 PM -0400):

> > if it's not representative, then surely it will be voted down, no?
> 
> Most certainly - but then that puts us in a constant state of voting. My
> preference is to put forward propositions that have benefitted from at least
> a few rounds of consideration, discussion and amendment...

ross--

i appreciate the force of your argument, but i don't think the 
history of GA activities bears it out. if in fact jamie's pro-
posal ends up initiating a torrent of arbitrary votes then the
GA can deal with the problem -- which is that torrent, not ja-
mie's proposal. i don't think the way in which this proposal's
been advanced breaks in any substantial way with past GA move-
ment; so invoking procedures that haven't been in force so far
as a way to sideline it seems tenuous. and it seems even more
tenuous to invoke speculative consequences as a justification
for sidelining it. the best way to deal with it is to vote on
its substance.

> (btw - any chance you'll be in bucharest?)

i wasn't planning on it, but it wouldn't be the first time i
went to a meeting on a whim.

cheers,
t
--
This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html