Next step -- Deciding on output

John Goerzen jgoerzen at
Thu Feb 6 15:02:23 UTC 2003

On Wed, Feb 05, 2003 at 11:12:36PM -0600, Taral wrote:
> > On a ballot it would look something like that plus "accept this change?
> > [y/n]"
> I disagree with this. Line iteming the bylaws doesn't seem particularly
> wise right now, since we're likely to make large-scope changes. If the
> board has issues with our proposed resolution, they will send it back to
> us to address them.

I agree with you.  Another problem is that if we have too many options,
people get confused and things move slower.

Are we all close enough that we could agree on two documents:

1. A specific amendment proposal, defining only what changes and omitting
   rationale/background (no WHEREAS clause)  This will contain things like
   "Replace section 5 with this text" and is intended to be voted on.
   It would be a full document to be voted on at once.

2. A document listing rationale for changes and background for them
   (combining two of the documents I had first proposed).

Sound reasonable?

More information about the Spi-bylaws mailing list