-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 0
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Consolidate voting on issues #1
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
Two significant changes: * remove the ability of the review committee to change the rules (which conflicts with the "not precedent-setting" nature of its operation.) * clarify what happens when a fix to a submission constitutes a significant improvement. The previous implication of section 3 was that such issues could not be waived, and it was not clear how to reconcile that with the voting rules in section 2. In practice the committee has waived them for e.g. first-time submitters and this is a useful freedom to preserve.
@@ -76,7 +76,11 @@ from the following list who are able and willing to vote: | |||
the non-submitting chairs of the relevant working group | |||
* A random number generator | |||
|
|||
If there are two outcomes, voting proceeds by simple majority. If there are more | |||
Changes in a submission that would add new results, improve existing results by more |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
do we need to add something like:
add new results using a method not covered by section 5.5/5.5.1 ?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
not sure if we need to somehow acknowledge that qualified late submissions are exempt from this rule
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
are we still engineers? i can't tell anymore
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
IANAL. I think.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I want to hold this one until after 5.5.1 has gone in - then we should reference it from here.
Two significant changes: