
<h1>Historical version of the Constitution for the Debian Project (v1.0)</h1>

<p>Version 1.0 ratified on December 2nd, 1998.</p>

<p>Superseded by
<a href="constitution.1.1">Version 1.1</a> ratified on June 21st, 2003,
<a href="constitution.1.2">Version 1.2</a> ratified on October 29th, 2003,
<a href="constitution.1.3">Version 1.3</a> ratified on September 24th, 2006,
<a href="constitution.1.4">Version 1.4</a> ratified on October 7th, 2007,
<a href="constitution.1.5">Version 1.5</a> ratified on January 9th, 2015,
<a href="constitution.1.6">Version 1.6</a> ratified on December 13th, 2015,
<a href="constitution.1.7">Version 1.7</a> ratified on August 14th, 2016,
<a href="constitution.1.8">Version 1.8</a> ratified on January 28th, 2022,
and the <a href="constitution">current version 1.9</a> ratified on March 26th,
2022.</p>

<h2>1. Introduction</h2>

<p><cite>The Debian Project is an association of individuals who have
made common cause to create a free operating system.</cite></p>

<p>This document describes the organisational structure for formal
decision-making in the Project.  It does not describe the goals of the
Project or how it achieves them, or contain any policies except those
directly related to the decision-making process.</p>

<h2>2. Decision-making bodies and individuals</h2>

<p>Each decision in the Project is made by one or more of the
following:</p>

<ol>
  <li>The Developers, by way of General Resolution or an election;</li>

  <li>The Project Leader;</li>

  <li>The Technical Committee and/or its Chairman;</li>

  <li>The individual Developer working on a particular task;</li>

  <li>Delegates appointed by the Project Leader for specific
  tasks;</li>

  <li>The Project Secretary.</li>
</ol>

<p>Most of the remainder of this document will outline the powers of
these bodies, their composition and appointment, and the procedure for
their decision-making.  The powers of a person or body may be subject to
review and/or limitation by others; in this case the reviewing body or
person's entry will state this.  <cite>In the list above, a person or
body is usually listed before any people or bodies whose decisions they
can overrule or who they (help) appoint - but not everyone listed
earlier can overrule everyone listed later.</cite></p>

<h3>2.1. General rules</h3>

<ol>
  <li>
    <p>Nothing in this constitution imposes an obligation on anyone to
    do work for the Project.  A person who does not want to do a task
    which has been delegated or assigned to them does not need to do
    it.  However, they must not actively work against these rules and
    decisions properly made under them.</p>
  </li>

  <li>
    <p>A person may hold several posts, except that the Project Leader,
    Project Secretary and the Chairman of the Technical Committee must
    be distinct, and that the Leader cannot appoint themselves as their
    own Delegate.</p>
  </li>

  <li>
    <p>A person may leave the Project or resign from a particular post
    they hold, at any time, by stating so publicly.</p>
  </li>
</ol>

<h2>3. Individual Developers</h2>

<h3>3.1. Powers</h3>

<p>An individual Developer may</p>

<ol>
  <li>make any technical or nontechnical decision with regard to their
  own work;</li>

  <li>propose or sponsor draft General Resolutions;</li>

  <li>propose themselves as a Project Leader candidate in
  elections;</li>

  <li>vote on General Resolutions and in Leadership elections.</li>
</ol>

<h3>3.2. Composition and appointment</h3>

<ol>
  <li>
    <p>Developers are volunteers who agree to further the aims of the
    Project insofar as they participate in it, and who maintain
    package(s) for the Project or do other work which the Project
    Leader's Delegate(s) consider worthwhile.</p>
  </li>

  <li>
    <p>The Project Leader's Delegate(s) may choose not to admit new
    Developers, or expel existing Developers.  <cite>If the Developers
    feel that the Delegates are abusing their authority they can of
    course override the decision by way of General Resolution - see
    &sect;4.1(3), &sect;4.2.</cite></p>
  </li>
</ol>

<h3>3.3. Procedure</h3>

<p>Developers may make these decisions as they see fit.</p>

<h2>4. The Developers by way of General Resolution or election</h2>

<h3>4.1. Powers</h3>

<p>Together, the Developers may:</p>

<ol>
  <li>
    <p>Appoint or recall the Project Leader.</p>
  </li>

  <li>
    <p>Amend this constitution, provided they agree with a 3:1
    majority.</p>
  </li>

  <li>
    <p>Override any decision by the Project Leader or a Delegate.</p>
  </li>

  <li>
    <p>Override any decision by the Technical Committee, provided they
    agree with a 2:1 majority.</p>
  </li>

  <li>
    <p>Issue nontechnical policy documents and statements.</p>

    <p>These include documents describing the goals of the project,
    its relationship with other free software entities, and
    nontechnical policies such as the free software licence terms that
    Debian software must meet.</p>

    <p>They may also include position statements about issues of the
    day.</p>
  </li>

  <li>
    <p>Together with the Project Leader and SPI, make decisions about
    property held in trust for purposes related to Debian.  (See
    &sect;9.1.)</p>
  </li>
</ol>

<h3>4.2. Procedure</h3>

<ol>
  <li>
    <p>The Developers follow the Standard Resolution Procedure, below.
    A resolution or amendment is introduced if proposed by any
    Developer and sponsored by at least K other Developers, or if
    proposed by the Project Leader or the Technical Committee.</p>
  </li>

  <li>
    <p>Delaying a decision by the Project Leader or their Delegate:</p>

    <ol>
      <li>If the Project Leader or their Delegate, or the Technical
      Committee, has made a decision, then Developers can override them
      by passing a resolution to do so; see &sect;4.1(3).</li>

      <li>If such a resolution is sponsored by at least 2K Developers,
      or if it is proposed by the Technical Committee, the resolution
      puts the decision immediately on hold (provided that resolution
      itself says so).</li>

      <li>If the original decision was to change a discussion period or
      a voting period, or the resolution is to override the Technical
      Committee, then only K Developers need to sponsor the resolution
      to be able to put the decision immediately on hold.</li>

      <li>If the decision is put on hold, an immediate vote is held to
      determine whether the decision will stand until the full vote on
      the decision is made or whether the implementation of the
      original decision will be delayed until then.  There is no
      quorum for this immediate procedural vote.</li>

      <li>If the Project Leader (or the Delegate) withdraws the
      original decision, the vote becomes moot, and is no longer
      conducted.</li>
    </ol>
  </li>

  <li>
    <p>Votes are taken by the Project Secretary.  Votes and tallies
     results are not be revealed during the voting period; after the
     vote the Project Secretary lists all the votes cast.  The voting
     period is 2 weeks, but may be varied by up to 1 week by the Project
     Leader, and may be ended by the Project Secretary when the outcome
     of a vote is no longer in doubt.</p>
  </li>

  <li>
    <p>The minimum discussion period is 2 weeks, but may be varied by
    up to 1 week by the Project Leader.  The Project Leader has a
    casting vote.  There is a quorum of 3Q.</p>
  </li>

  <li>
    <p>Proposals, sponsors, amendments, calls for votes and other
    formal actions are made by announcement on a publicly-readable
    electronic mailing list designated by the Project Leader's
    Delegate(s); any Developer may post there.</p>
  </li>

  <li>
    <p>Votes are cast by email in a manner suitable to the Secretary.
    The Secretary determines for each poll whether voters can change
    their votes.</p>
  </li>

  <li>
    <p>Q is half of the square root of the number of current
    Developers.  K is Q or 5, whichever is the smaller.  Q and K need not
    be integers and are not rounded.</p>
  </li>
</ol>

<h2>5. Project Leader</h2>

<h3>5.1. Powers</h3>

<p>The <a href="leader">Project Leader</a> may:</p>

<ol>
  <li>
    <p>Appoint Delegates or delegate decisions to the Technical
    Committee.</p>

    <p>The Leader may define an area of ongoing responsibility or a
    specific decision and hand it over to another Developer or to the
    Technical Committee.</p>

    <p>Once a particular decision has been delegated and made the
    Project Leader may not withdraw that delegation; however, they may
    withdraw an ongoing delegation of particular area of
    responsibility.</p>
  </li>

  <li>
    <p>Lend authority to other Developers.</p>

    <p>The Project Leader may make statements of support for points of
    view or for other members of the project, when asked or otherwise;
    these statements have force if and only if the Leader would be
    empowered to make the decision in question.</p>
  </li>

  <li>
    <p>Make any decision which requires urgent action.</p>

    <p>This does not apply to decisions which have only become
    gradually urgent through lack of relevant action, unless there is a
    fixed deadline.</p>
  </li>

  <li>
    <p>Make any decision for whom noone else has responsibility.</p>
  </li>

  <li>
    <p>Propose draft General Resolutions and amendments.</p>
  </li>

  <li>
    <p>Together with the Technical Committee, appoint new members to
    the Committee.  (See &sect;6.2.)</p>
  </li>

  <li>
    <p>Use a casting vote when Developers vote.</p>

    <p>The Project Leader also has a normal vote in such ballots.</p>
  </li>

  <li>
    <p>Vary the discussion period for Developers' votes (as above).</p>
  </li>

  <li>
    <p>Lead discussions amongst Developers.</p>

    <p>The Project Leader should attempt to participate in discussions
    amongst the Developers in a helpful way which seeks to bring the
    discussion to bear on the key issues at hand.  The Project Leader
    should not use the Leadership position to promote their own
    personal views.</p>
  </li>

  <li>
    <p>Together with SPI, make decisions affecting property held in
    trust for purposes related to Debian.  (See &sect;9.1.)</p>
  </li>
</ol>

<h3>5.2. Appointment</h3>

<ol>
  <li>The Project Leader is elected by the Developers.</li>

  <li>The election begins nine weeks before the leadership post becomes
  vacant, or (if it is too late already) immediately.</li>

  <li>For the following three weeks any Developer may nominate
  themselves as a candidate Project Leader.</li>

  <li>For three weeks after that no more candidates may be nominated;
  candidates should use this time for campaigning (to make their
  identities and positions known).  If there are no candidates at the
  end of the nomination period then the nomination period is extended
  for three further weeks, repeatedly if necessary.</li>

  <li>The next three weeks are the polling period during which
  Developers may cast their votes.  Votes in leadership elections are
  kept secret, even after the election is finished.</li>

  <li>The options on the ballot will be those candidates who have
  nominated themselves and have not yet withdrawn, plus None Of The
  Above.  If None Of The Above wins the election then the election
  procedure is repeated, many times if necessary.</li>

  <li>The decision will be made using Concorde Vote Counting.  The
  quorum is the same as for a General Resolution (&sect;4.2) and the
  default option is None Of The Above.</li>

  <li>The Project Leader serves for one year from their election.</li>
</ol>

<h3>5.3. Procedure</h3>

<p>The Project Leader should attempt to make decisions which are
consistent with the consensus of the opinions of the Developers.</p>

<p>Where practical the Project Leader should informally solicit the
views of the Developers.</p>

<p>The Project Leader should avoid overemphasizing their own point of
view when making decisions in their capacity as Leader.</p>

<h2>6. Technical committee</h2>

<h3>6.1. Powers</h3>

<p>The <a href="tech-ctte">Technical Committee</a> may:</p>

<ol>
  <li>
    <p>Decide on any matter of technical policy.</p>

    <p>This includes the contents of the technical policy manuals,
    developers' reference materials, example packages and the behaviour
    of non-experimental package building tools.  (In each case the usual
    maintainer of the relevant software or documentation makes
    decisions initially, however; see 6.3(5).)</p>
  </li>

  <li>
    <p>Decide any technical matter where Developers' jurisdictions
    overlap.</p>

    <p>In cases where Developers need to implement compatible
    technical policies or stances (for example, if they disagree about
    the priorities of conflicting packages, or about ownership of a
    command name, or about which package is responsible for a bug that
    both maintainers agree is a bug, or about who should be the
    maintainer for a package) the technical committee may decide the
    matter.</p>
  </li>

  <li>
    <p>Make a decision when asked to do so.</p>

    <p>Any person or body may delegate a decision of their own to the
    Technical Committee, or seek advice from it.</p>
  </li>

  <li>
    <p>Overrule a Developer (requires a 3:1 majority).</p>

    <p>The Technical Committee may ask a Developer to take a
    particular technical course of action even if the Developer does
    not wish to; this requires a 3:1 majority.  For example, the
    Committee may determine that a complaint made by the submitter of a
    bug is justified and that the submitter's proposed solution should
    be implemented.</p>
  </li>

  <li>
    <p>Offer advice.</p>

    <p>The Technical Committee may make formal announcements about its
    views on any matter.  <cite>Individual members may of course make
    informal statements about their views and about the likely views of
    the committee.</cite></p>
  </li>

  <li>
    <p>Together with the Project Leader, appoint new members to itself
    or remove existing members.  (See &sect;6.2.)</p>
  </li>

  <li>
    <p>Appoint the Chairman of the Technical Committee.</p>

    <p>The Chairman is elected by the Committee from its members.  All
    members of the committee are automatically nominated; the committee
    vote starting one week before the post will become vacant (or
    immediately, if it is already too late).  The members may vote by
    public acclamation for any fellow committee member, including
    themselves; there is no None Of The Above option.  The vote finishes
    when all the members have voted or when the outcome is no longer in
    doubt.  The result is determined according to Concorde Vote
    Counting.</p>
  </li>

  <li>
    <p>The Chairman can stand in for the Leader, together with the
    Secretary</p>

    <p>As detailed in &sect;7.1(2), the Chairman of the Technical
    Committee and the Project Secretary may together stand in for the
    Leader if there is no Leader.</p>
  </li>
</ol>

<h3>6.2. Composition</h3>

<ol>
  <li>
    <p>The Technical Committee consists of up to 8 Developers, and
    should usually have at least 4 members.</p>
  </li>

  <li>
    <p>When there are fewer than 8 members the Technical Committee may
    recommend new member(s) to the Project Leader, who may choose
    (individually) to appoint them or not.</p>
  </li>

  <li>
    <p>When there are 5 members or fewer the Technical Committee may
    appoint new member(s) until the number of members reaches 6.</p>
  </li>

  <li>
    <p>When there have been 5 members or fewer for at least one week
    the Project Leader may appoint new member(s) until the number of
    members reaches 6, at intervals of at least one week per
    appointment.</p>
  </li>

  <li>
    <p>If the Technical Committee and the Project Leader agree they
    may remove or replace an existing member of the Technical
    Committee.</p>
  </li>
</ol>

<h3>6.3. Procedure</h3>

<ol>
  <li>
    <p>The Technical Committee uses the Standard Resolution
    Procedure.</p>

    <p>A draft resolution or amendment may be proposed by any member
    of the Technical Committee.  There is no minimum discussion period;
    the voting period lasts for up to one week, or until the outcome is
    no longer in doubt.  Members may change their votes.  There is a
    quorum of two.</p>
  </li>

  <li>
    <p>Details regarding voting</p>

    <p>The Chairman has a casting vote.  When the Technical Committee
    votes whether to override a Developer who also happens to be a
    member of the Committee, that member may not vote (unless they are
    the Chairman, in which case they may use only their casting
    vote).</p>
  </li>

  <li>
    <p>Public discussion and decision-making.</p>

    <p>Discussion, draft resolutions and amendments, and votes by
    members of the committee, are made public on the Technical
    Committee public discussion list.  There is no separate secretary
    for the Committee.</p>
  </li>

  <li>
    <p>Confidentiality of appointments.</p>

    <p>The Technical Committee may hold confidential discussions via
    private email or a private mailing list or other means to discuss
    appointments to the Committee.  However, votes on appointments must
    be public.</p>
  </li>

  <li>
    <p>No detailed design work.</p>

    <p>The Technical Committee does not engage in design of new
    proposals and policies.  Such design work should be carried out by
    individuals privately or together and discussed in ordinary
    technical policy and design forums.</p>

    <p>The Technical Committee restricts itself to choosing from or
    adopting compromises between solutions and decisions which have
    been proposed and reasonably thoroughly discussed elsewhere.</p>

    <p><cite>Individual members of the technical committee may of
    course participate on their own behalf in any aspect of design and
    policy work.</cite></p>
  </li>

  <li>
    <p>Technical Committee makes decisions only as last resort.</p>

    <p>The Technical Committee does not make a technical decision
    until efforts to resolve it via consensus have been tried and
    failed, unless it has been asked to make a decision by the person
    or body who would normally be responsible for it.</p>
  </li>
</ol>

<h2>7. The Project Secretary</h2>

<h3>7.1. Powers</h3>

<p>The <a href="secretary">Secretary</a>:</p>

<ol>
  <li>
    <p>Takes votes amongst the Developers, and determines the number
    and identity of Developers, whenever this is required by the
    constitution.</p>
  </li>

  <li>
    <p>Can stand in for the Leader, together with the Chairman of the
    Technical Committee.</p>

    <p>If there is no Project Leader then the Chairman of the
    Technical Committee and the Project Secretary may by joint
    agreement make decisions if they consider it imperative to do
    so.</p>
  </li>

  <li>
    <p>Adjudicates any disputes about interpretation of the
    constitution.</p>
  </li>

  <li>
    <p>May delegate part or all of their authority to someone else, or
    withdraw such a delegation at any time.</p>
  </li>
</ol>

<h3>7.2. Appointment</h3>

<p>The Project Secretary is appointed by the Project Leader and the
current Project Secretary.</p>

<p>If the Project Leader and the current Project Secretary cannot
agree on a new appointment they must ask the board of SPI (see &sect;9.1.) 
to appoint a Secretary.</p>

<p>If there is no Project Secretary or the current Secretary is
unavailable and has not delegated authority for a decision then the
decision may be made or delegated by the Chairman of the Technical
Committee, as Acting Secretary.</p>

<p>The Project Secretary's term of office is 1 year, at which point
they or another Secretary must be (re)appointed.</p>

<h3>7.3. Procedure</h3>

<p>The Project Secretary should make decisions which are fair and
reasonable, and preferably consistent with the consensus of the
Developers.</p>

<p>When acting together to stand in for an absent Project Leader the
Chairman of the Technical Committee and the Project Secretary should
make decisions only when absolutely necessary and only when consistent
with the consensus of the Developers.</p>

<h2>8. The Project Leader's Delegates</h2>

<h3>8.1. Powers</h3>

<p>The Project Leader's Delegates:</p>

<ol>
  <li>have powers delegated to them by the Project Leader;</li>

  <li>may make certain decisions which the Leader may not make
  directly, including approving or expelling Developers or designating
  people as Developers who do not maintain packages.  <cite>This is to
  avoid concentration of power, particularly over membership as a
  Developer, in the hands of the Project Leader.</cite></li>
</ol>

<h3>8.2. Appointment</h3>

<p>The Delegates are appointed by the Project Leader and may be
replaced by the Leader at the Leader's discretion.  The Project Leader
may not make the position as a Delegate conditional on particular
decisions by the Delegate, nor may they override a decision made by a
Delegate once made.</p>

<h3>8.3. Procedure</h3>

<p>Delegates may make decisions as they see fit, but should attempt to
implement good technical decisions and/or follow consensus opinion.</p>

<h2>9. Software in the Public Interest</h2>

<p><a href="https://www.spi-inc.org/">SPI</a> and Debian are separate
organisations who share some goals.  Debian is grateful for the legal
support framework offered by SPI.  <cite>Debian's Developers are
currently members of SPI by virtue of their status as
Developers.</cite></p>

<h3>9.1. Authority</h3>

<ol>
  <li>SPI has no authority regarding Debian's technical or nontechnical
  decisions, except that no decision by Debian with respect to any
  property held by SPI shall require SPI to act outside its legal
  authority, and that Debian's constitution may occasionally use SPI as
  a decision body of last resort.</li>

  <li>Debian claims no authority over SPI other than that over the use
  of certain of SPI's property, as described below, though Debian
  Developers may be granted authority within SPI by SPI's rules.</li>

  <li>Debian Developers are not agents or employees of SPI, or of each
  other or of persons in authority in the Debian Project.  A person
  acting as a Developer does so as an individual, on their own
  behalf.</li>
</ol>

<h3>9.2. Management of property for purposes related to Debian</h3>

<p>Since Debian has no authority to hold money or property, any
donations for the Debian Project must be made to SPI, which manages such
affairs.</p>

<p>SPI have made the following undertakings:</p>

<ol>
  <li>SPI will hold money, trademarks and other tangible and intangible
  property and manage other affairs for purposes related to
  Debian.</li>

  <li>Such property will be accounted for separately and held in trust
  for those purposes, decided on by Debian and SPI according to this
  section.</li>

  <li>SPI will not dispose of or use property held in trust for Debian
  without approval from Debian, which may be granted by the Project
  Leader or by General Resolution of the Developers.</li>

  <li>SPI will consider using or disposing of property held in trust
  for Debian when asked to do so by the Project Leader.</li>

  <li>SPI will use or dispose of property held in trust for Debian when
  asked to do so by a General Resolution of the Developers, provided
  that this is compatible with SPI's legal authority.</li>

  <li>SPI will notify the Developers by electronic mail to a Debian
  Project mailing list when it uses or disposes of property held in
  trust for Debian.</li>
</ol>

<h2>A. Standard Resolution Procedure</h2>

<p>These rules apply to communal decision-making by committees and
plebiscites, where stated above.</p>

<h3>A.1. Proposal</h3>

<p>The formal procedure begins when a draft resolution is proposed and
sponsored, as required.</p>

<h3>A.1. Discussion and Amendment</h3>

<ol>
  <li>Following the proposal, the resolution may be discussed.
  Amendments may be made formal by being proposed and sponsored
  according to the requirements for a new resolution, or directly by
  the proposer of the original resolution.</li>

  <li>A formal amendment may be accepted by the resolution's proposer,
  in which case the formal resolution draft is immediately changed to
  match.</li>

  <li>If a formal amendment is not accepted, or one of the sponsors of
  the resolution does not agree with the acceptance by the proposer of
  a formal amendment, the amendment remains as an amendment and will be
  voted on.</li>

  <li>If an amendment accepted by the original proposer is not to the
  liking of others, they may propose another amendment to reverse the
  earlier change (again, they must meet the requirements for proposer
  and sponsor(s).)</li>

  <li>The proposer of a resolution may suggest changes to the wordings
  of amendments; these take effect if the proposer of the amendment
  agrees and none of the sponsors object.  In this case the changed
  amendments will be voted on instead of the originals.</li>

  <li>The proposer of a resolution may make changes to correct minor
  errors (for example, typographical errors or inconsistencies) or
  changes which do not alter the meaning, providing noone objects
  within 24 hours.  In this case the minimum discussion period is not
  restarted.</li>
</ol>

<h3>A.2. Calling for a vote</h3>

<ol>
  <li>The proposer or a sponsor of a motion or an amendment may call
  for a vote, providing that the minimum discussion period (if any) has
  elapsed.</li>

  <li>The proposer or a sponsor of a motion may call for a vote on any
  or all of the amendments individually or together; the proposer or
  sponsor of an amendment may call for a vote only on that amendment
  and related amendments.</li>

  <li>The person who calls for a vote states what they believe the
  wordings of the resolution and any relevant amendments are, and
  consequently what form the ballot should take.  However, the final
  decision on the form of ballot(s) is the Secretary's - see 7.1(1),
  7.1(3) and A.3(6).</li>

  <li>The minimum discussion period is counted from the time the last
  formal amendment was accepted, or the last related formal amendment
  was accepted if an amendment is being voted on, or since the whole
  resolution was proposed if no amendments have been proposed and
  accepted.</li>
</ol>

<h3>A.3. Voting procedure</h3>

<ol>
  <li>Each independent set of related amendments is voted on in a
  separate ballot.  Each such ballot has as options all the sensible
  combinations of amendments and options, and an option Further
  Discussion.  If Further Discussion wins then the entire resolution
  procedure is set back to the start of the discussion period.  No
  quorum is required for an amendment.</li>

  <li>When the final form of the resolution has been determined it is
  voted on in a final ballot, in which the options are Yes, No and
  Further Discussion.  If Further Discussion wins then the entire
  procedure is set back to the start of the discussion period.</li>

  <li>The vote taker (if there is one) or the voters (if voting is done
  by public pronouncement) may arrange for these ballots to be held
  simultaneously, even (for example) using a single voting message.  If
  amendment ballot(s) and the final ballot are combined in this way
  then it must be possible for a voter to vote differently in the final
  ballot for each of the possible forms of the final draft
  resolution.</li>

  <li>Votes may be cast during the voting period, as specified
  elsewhere.  If the voting period can end if the outcome is no longer
  in doubt, the possibility that voters may change their votes is not
  considered.</li>

  <li>The votes are counted according to the Concorde Vote Counting.  If
  a quorum is required then the default option is Further
  Discussion.</li>

  <li>In cases of doubt the Project Secretary shall decide on matters
  of procedure (for example, whether particular amendments should be
  considered independent or not).</li>
</ol>

<h3>A.4. Withdrawing resolutions or unaccepted amendments</h3>

<p>The proposer of a resolution or unaccepted amendment may withdraw
it.  In this case new proposers may come forward keep it alive, in which
case the first person to do so becomes the new proposer and any others
become sponsors if they aren't sponsors already.</p>

<p>A sponsor of a resolution or amendment (unless it has been
accepted) may withdraw.</p>

<p>If the withdrawal of the proposer and/or sponsors means that a
resolution has no proposer or not enough sponsors it will not be voted
on unless this is rectified before the resolution expires.</p>

<h3>A.5. Expiry</h3>

<p>If a proposed resolution has not been discussed, amended, voted on
or otherwise dealt with for 4 weeks then it is considered to have been
withdrawn.</p>

<h3>A.6. Concorde Vote Counting</h3>

<ol>
  <li>This is used to determine the winner amongst a list of options.
  Each ballot paper gives a ranking of the voter's preferred options.
  (The ranking need not be complete.)</li>

  <li>Option A is said to Dominate option B if strictly more ballots
  prefer A to B than prefer B to A.</li>

  <li>All options which are Dominated by at least one other option are
  discarded, and references to them in ballot papers will be
  ignored.</li>

  <li>If there is any option which Dominates all others then that is
  the winner.</li>

  <li>
    If there is now more than one option remaining Single Transferrable
    Vote will be applied to choose amongst those remaining:

    <ul>
      <li>The number of first preferences for each option is counted,
      and if any option has more than half it is the winner.</li>

      <li>Otherwise the option with the lowest number of first
      preferences is eliminated and its votes redistributed according
      to the second preferences.</li>

      <li>This elimination procedure is repeated, moving down ballot
      papers to 2nd, 3rd, 4th, etc. preferences as required, until one
      option gets more than half of the <q>first</q> preferences.</li>
    </ul>
  </li>

  <li>In the case of ties the elector with a casting vote will decide.
  The casting vote does not count as a normal vote; however that
  elector will usually also get a normal vote.</li>

  <li>If a supermajority is required the number of Yes votes in the
  final ballot is reduced by an appropriate factor.  Strictly speaking,
  for a supermajority of F:A, the number of ballots which prefer Yes to
  X (when considering whether Yes Dominates X or X Dominates Yes) or
  the number of ballots whose first (remaining) preference is Yes (when
  doing STV comparisons for winner and elimination purposes) is
  multiplied by a factor A/F before the comparison is done.  <cite>This
  means that a 2:1 vote, for example, means twice as many people voted
  for as against; abstentions are not counted.</cite></li>

  <li>If a quorum is required, there must be at least that many votes
  which prefer the winning option to the default option.  If there are
  not then the default option wins after all.  For votes requiring a
  supermajority, the actual number of Yes votes is used when checking
  whether the quorum has been reached.</li>
</ol>

<p><cite>When the Standard Resolution Procedure is to be used, the text
which refers to it must specify what is sufficient to have a draft
resolution proposed and/or sponsored, what the minimum discussion
period is, and what the voting period is.  It must also specify any
supermajority and/or the quorum (and default option) to be
used.</cite></p>

<h2>B. Use of language and typography</h2>

<p>The present indicative (<q>is</q>, for example) means that the statement
is a rule in this constitution.  <q>May</q> or <q>can</q> indicates that the
person or body has discretion.  <q>Should</q> means that it would be
considered a good thing if the sentence were obeyed, but it is not
binding.  <cite>Text marked as a citation, such as this, is rationale
and does not form part of the constitution.  It may be used only to aid
interpretation in cases of doubt.</cite></p>
