I wrote a couple of mails to this list, but seems like I had a wrong email address registered to the ML so none of my messages got through the filters.  Incidentally, none of my votes have gone through either.

Here's a digest:


You don't bother being
involved with the selection of new Trusted Users? Unless you're marked
explicitly as inactive you shouldn't be able to skip votes because
you're not bothered.

No, no no. We cannot force people to vote, that also means that the vote means
nothing.

>From the very beginning, I felt uneasy about that part of the bylaws, but I
accepted it since I did not think anyone would think of enforcing it unless
things get very bad.

Perhaps we should change that bylaw?


[and on another mail]


The most important function of a TU is making packages to a central repository that people trust. It is why the whole thing exists, is it not?  For me personally, this arrangement has worked excellently exactly because I have been able to concentrate solely on the work. In fact, this is why Arch Linux has worked excellently. It is mostly clean of BS, and so are we.

Instead of going into a flamewar (which I admit inciting a bit), perhaps we should try a more positive approach to the problem, which is not "How can we punish those uppity drones" but "Why don't the drones vote?"  I usually don't vote when the applicant is somebody I don't know. In that case, my vote would be random whatever the case.  What is the point in forcing uninformed people to vote?
 
--vk aka vegai