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".