3:55 p.m.
On Mon, Apr 5, 2021 at 6:00 PM Ricardo Wurmus <rekado(a)elephly.net> wrote:
If the requirement to vote is endorsement of the Social Contract, we
will exclude many GNU maintainers who disagree with the necessity for
such a Social Contract. I’m not clear on what “membership” really
entails, but it seems to me that there’s a danger of a circular
definition.
What makes it circular?
Do we want to tolerate or even invite the dissent of those who
disagree
with the Social Contract? (Can we afford to?)
We can and we should. You can be on the assembly mailing list and
discuss exactly this point.
However, radical deviation from consensus is going to be hard because
you have to convince existing members to vote to change the Social
Contract.
Cheers,
Carlos.