[aur-general] [tu-bylaws][PATCH]
Hi, Here's a patch for the TU-bylaws that resulted from discussion in the previous thread: https://mailman.archlinux.org/pipermail/aur-general/2013-August/024745.html I hope this is in the correct format. I haven't used git send-email because I still haven't configured it and didn't want to risk doing something stupid in a hurry. For those of you who prefer reading the resulting document, I have attached the source file and the generated HTML file. Please read through the previous thread for an explanation of the changes. Let the discussion period begin! From 8328526fc0fef469d9edb1abf0f0448c2f440e90 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Xyne <xyne@archlinux.ca> Date: Wed, 7 Aug 2013 13:55:37 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] Following discussion on aur-general (https://mailman.archlinux.org/pipermail/aur-general/2013-August/024745.html): * remove distinction between "active" and "inactive" TUs * update all clauses affected by this change, most importantly the definition of quorum * update conditions for special removal of a TU * use abbreviations consistently through the document * add missing links to instances of "aur-general" * various changes to correct or improve English throughout the document --- tu-bylaws.txt | 122 ++++++++++++++++++++++++---------------------------------- 1 file changed, 50 insertions(+), 72 deletions(-) diff --git a/tu-bylaws.txt b/tu-bylaws.txt index 991d683..4c0699b 100644 --- a/tu-bylaws.txt +++ b/tu-bylaws.txt @@ -1,7 +1,7 @@ Trusted User Bylaws =================== Trusted Users <aur-general@archlinux.org> -1.2, 18 January 2011 +1.3, 2013-08-07 Summary ------- @@ -12,7 +12,7 @@ duties. Mission ------- -The Trusted Users serve the following purposes: +The Trusted Users (TUs) serve the following purposes: 1. Maintain +[community]+ as an intermediary between Archlinux's official repositories and the +unsupported+ package collection in the AUR. @@ -22,10 +22,10 @@ repositories and the +unsupported+ package collection in the AUR. Bylaws ------ -The bylaws are written to be consistent with the mission of the Trusted Users, -and to ensure that Trusted Users continue to be *Trusted* in the future. They -are also written with the intent to keep the Trusted User organization a -thriving one, fulfilling their purpose. +The bylaws are written to be consistent with the mission of the TUs, +and to ensure that TUs continue to be *Trusted* in the future. They +are also written with the intent to keep the TU organization a +thriving one, fulfilling its purpose. Standard Voting Procedure ------------------------- @@ -35,31 +35,23 @@ accept or reject proposals regarding TU affairs. SVP begins with a proposal, for example the addition of a TU or an amendment to the bylaws. The proposal should be clear and concise and it must be posted on -the aur-general mailing list (aur-general). The proposal must also be worded +the https://mailman.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/aur-general[aur-general mailing list] (aur-general). The proposal must also be worded unambiguously, and such that a YES or NO answer may be given. -The discussion period begins when the proposal is posted on aur-general. The +The discussion period begins when the proposal is posted on https://mailman.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/aur-general[aur-general]. The duration of the discussion period shall be 5 full days UNLESS otherwise stated in a section of the bylaws pertaining to the proposal. Official discussion -shall take place on aur-general. During the discussion period, votes shall not +shall take place on https://mailman.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/aur-general[aur-general]. During the discussion period, votes shall not be cast. The voting period begins when the discussion period ends. The duration of the voting period shall be 7 full days UNLESS otherwise stated in a section of the bylaws pertaining to the proposal. During the voting period, TUs may vote YES, -NO or ABSTAIN. Votes shall be cast under the Trusted User section of the AUR -homepage. At the end of the voting period, all votes shall be tallied. - -In the context of SVP, TUs are considered active if they are marked as active -when the voting period ends. - -Quorum shall be 66% of all active TUs and participation shall be measured by -the sum of YES, NO and ABSTAIN votes, UNLESS otherwise stated in a section of -the bylaws pertaining to the proposal. +NO or ABSTAIN. Votes shall be cast under the Trusted User section of the https://aur.archlinux.org/[AUR website]. At the end of the voting period, all votes shall be tallied. The proposal is accepted if EITHER -1. the number of YES votes is greater than half the number of active TUs OR +1. the number of YES votes is greater than half the number of TUs OR 2. quorum has been established and the number of YES votes is greater than the number of NO votes @@ -68,8 +60,7 @@ UNLESS otherwise stated in a section of the bylaws pertaining to the proposal. The proposal is rejected if EITHER -1. the number of NO votes is greater than or equal to half the number of active -TUs OR +1. the number of NO votes is greater than or equal to half the number of TUs OR 2. quorum was established and the number of NO votes is greater than or equal to the number of YES votes @@ -90,47 +81,20 @@ second SVP then it shall be rejected. Quorum ------ -This section deals with quorums, and the consequences for those that repeatedly -keep the group from meeting them. - -Quorums were established to make sure that all TUs are having a say in the -matters that they vote on, and to ensure that TUs remain active in the job that -they have taken on. All active TUs should be participating in discussions and -voting procedures in order to continue meeting the quorums. For this reason, -active TUs that keep quorum from being established on a voting procedure for -three consecutive voting procedures (they need not be on the same motion) are -automatically brought up for removal procedure, by reason of unwarranted -inactivity. - -Active vs. Inactive -------------------- - -A Trusted User will have an activity status at all times. Only two statuses -exist, +active+, and +inactive+. A TU should remain active whenever possible, -and avoid being inactive, especially without declaring it. - -An active TU participates in all TU tasks and activities normally. - -A TU may declare themselves inactive, for instance if they are going on -vacation, by sending a message to -https://mailman.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/aur-general[aur-general]. TUs -are expected to step down altogether if they plan on becoming inactive for a -period longer than 2 months. It is expected that while inactive, a TU is -unable to maintain packages and partake in normal TU activities. They are -exempt from quorums and in fact cannot vote. A TU becomes active again at the -stated date on their original inactivity declaration, or when they declare -themselves such. +Quorums were established to ensure that all matters decided by vote are +representative of the TU group. All TUs are expected to participate in all votes +and the preceding discussions whenever possible. -If a TU becomes inactive without declaring it, "disappears", someone must -motion for their removal for reason of unwarranted and undeclared inactivity, -and the normal procedure for the motion is followed. +Quorum shall be 66% of all TUs and participation shall be measured by +the sum of YES, NO and ABSTAIN votes, UNLESS otherwise stated in a section of +the bylaws pertaining to the proposal. Addition of a TU ---------------- -The addition of a Trusted User may occur at any time. +The addition of a TU may occur at any time. -In order to become a Trusted User, one must first find a sponsoring active TU, +In order to become a TU, one must first find a sponsoring TU, and arrange privately with them to announce their candidacy on the https://mailman.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/aur-general[aur-general] mailing list. Following the announcement, standard voting procedure commences with a @@ -146,32 +110,46 @@ User for a period of three months. Removal of a TU --------------- -The removal of a Trusted User may also occur at any time. +The removal of a TU may also occur at any time. -A motion must be made by at least two active Trusted Users for the removal of a -Trusted User. The motion must be sent to +A motion must be made by at least two TUs for the removal of a +TU. The motion must be sent to https://mailman.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/aur-general[aur-general], and contain a detailed and valid reason that the TU in question should be removed. Following the motion, standard voting procedure commences with a discussion -period of 7 days, a quorum of 75%, and a voting period of 7 days. +period of 7 days, a quorum of 75% of all TUs except for the TU being considered +for removal, and a voting period of 7 days. + ---- SVP( general_removal_of_TU, 7, 0.75, 7); ---- -The Trusted User brought up for removal may defend themselves during the -discussion period, but may not vote during the voting period, nor may they vote -on any other matters while SVP for their removal is in progress. +The TU brought up for removal may defend themselves during the +discussion period, but may not vote on the proposal. + + +Special Removal of an Inactive TU +~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ + +A TU who has not done ANY of the following for a period of at least 2 months: + +1. added, removed or updated a package in +[community]+ or the AUR + +2. performed any action that required TU privileges on the AUR + +3. posted a message to https://mailman.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/aur-general[aur-general] + +OR who has not voted in a consecutive series of voting periods, the starting dates +of which span 2 months or more, shall be brought up for special removal due to +inactivity. -There is one special case for removal, removal due to unwarranted and -undeclared inactivity, for which standard voting procedure deviates from the -above. This motion is also automatically triggered by repeated quorum offenses, -as described in the <<Q,Quorum>> subsection of this document. For this special -case, SVP is followed with a discussion period of three days, a quorum of 66%, -and a voting period of 5 days. +In this special case, the motion may be made by one TU instead of two, and SVP +is followed by a discussion period of three days, a quorum of 66%, and a voting +period of 5 days. ---- -SVP( inactivity_removal_of_TU, 3, 0.66, 5 ); +SVP( removal_of_inactive_TU, 3, 0.66, 5 ); ---- Amendment of Bylaws @@ -179,7 +157,7 @@ Amendment of Bylaws These bylaws may be amended at any time. -An active Trusted User must motion for an amendment by sending an announcement +A TU must motion for an amendment by sending an announcement to https://mailman.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/aur-general[aur-general]. The message must either contain, or have attached, a patch against this document which accomplishes the suggested change. SVP is commenced at the time @@ -190,5 +168,5 @@ voting period of 7 days. SVP( amend_bylaws, 5, 0.75, 7); ---- -If the amendment fails, the same amendment may not be motioned for for a period +If the amendment fails, the same amendment may not be motioned for a period of three weeks. -- 1.8.3.4
On 9 August 2013 19:29, Xyne <xyne@archlinux.ca> wrote:
... * remove distinction between "active" and "inactive" TUs
So now what happens when so-called active or inactive TUs do not vote and prevent quorum from being established? No action is taken? I see these changes cover disappearing TUs, but not non-participating TUs. I may also just be missing something.
... * various changes to correct or improve English throughout the document
While you're at it:
... mailing list] (aur-general). The proposal must also be worded unambiguously, and such that a YES or NO answer may be given.
-and such that +such that
... 2. quorum was established and the number of NO votes is greater than or equal to the number of YES votes
-quorum was established +quorum has been established
... +Quorums were established to ensure that all matters decided by vote are +representative of the TU group. All TUs are expected to participate in all
The terms "quorum" and "established" are already used in the document with a different meaning, so different wording could be used here, e.g.: +Quorums ensure that matters decided by vote are +representative of the voters as a group. All TUs are expected to participate in all
+A motion must be made by at least two TUs for the removal of a +TU. The motion must be sent to
-removal of a +removal of another
https://mailman.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/aur-general[aur-general], and contain a detailed and valid reason that the TU in question should be removed.
-that the +why the
+OR who has not voted in a consecutive series of voting periods, the starting
How many "consecutive series"?
+is followed by a discussion period of three days, a quorum of 66%, and a voting
-three days +3 days -- GPG/PGP ID: C0711BF1
Rashif Ray Rahman wrote:
On 9 August 2013 19:29, Xyne <xyne@archlinux.ca> wrote:
... * remove distinction between "active" and "inactive" TUs
So now what happens when so-called active or inactive TUs do not vote and prevent quorum from being established? No action is taken? I see these changes cover disappearing TUs, but not non-participating TUs. I may also just be missing something.
+OR who has not voted in a consecutive series of voting periods, the starting
How many "consecutive series"?
The full phrase is "who has not voted in a consecutive series of voting periods, the starting dates of which span 2 months or more, shall be brought up for special removal due to inactivity". The sub-clause thus specifies that the length of the series is determined by time, not by number of votes. So, any TU that misses all votes during a period of 2 months falls under the special case for removals. This replaces the old clause specifying 3 votes, as they could easily occur in the same week. Being inactive for a week should not be grounds for special removal. Remember though, this is just for invocation of the special case. If any TU notices that any other TU habitually misses votes then we can start a discussion about it and motion for that TU's removal if deemed appropriate. The other thread contained a suggestion for a TU status page that would show vote participation over some fixed period of time to facilitate the determination of participation. The current by-laws try to automate a process that requires human discretion. This version retains automation for extreme cases and relies on human discretion for the rest. In either case, someone still has to monitor activity of other TUs to determine if there are grounds for removal, but this way will avoid silly edge cases. It is our responsibility to keep an eye on each other, rather than simply induct new TUs and then forget about them until some special case occurs.
+A motion must be made by at least two TUs for the removal of a +TU. The motion must be sent to
-removal of a +removal of another
There is no reason to prevent a TU from motioning for his own removal, even if it would be silly to do so. I have reworded the clause in a more natural way: +A motion for the removal of a TU must be made by at least 2 TUs. The motion must +be sent to Patch follows: From abf7664c2b8c99a2e14b8aff8e37b727fdce7d9b Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Xyne <xyne@archlinux.ca> Date: Wed, 7 Aug 2013 13:55:37 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] Following discussion on aur-general (https://mailman.archlinux.org/pipermail/aur-general/2013-August/024745.html): * remove distinction between "active" and "inactive" TUs * update all clauses affected by this change, most importantly the definition of quorum * update conditions for special removal of a TU * use abbreviations consistently through the document * add missing links to instances of "aur-general" * various changes to correct or improve English throughout the document --- tu-bylaws.txt | 139 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------------------------- 1 file changed, 61 insertions(+), 78 deletions(-) diff --git a/tu-bylaws.txt b/tu-bylaws.txt index 991d683..4e8c5e2 100644 --- a/tu-bylaws.txt +++ b/tu-bylaws.txt @@ -1,7 +1,7 @@ Trusted User Bylaws =================== Trusted Users <aur-general@archlinux.org> -1.2, 18 January 2011 +1.3, 2013-08-07 Summary ------- @@ -12,7 +12,7 @@ duties. Mission ------- -The Trusted Users serve the following purposes: +The Trusted Users (TUs) serve the following purposes: 1. Maintain +[community]+ as an intermediary between Archlinux's official repositories and the +unsupported+ package collection in the AUR. @@ -22,10 +22,10 @@ repositories and the +unsupported+ package collection in the AUR. Bylaws ------ -The bylaws are written to be consistent with the mission of the Trusted Users, -and to ensure that Trusted Users continue to be *Trusted* in the future. They -are also written with the intent to keep the Trusted User organization a -thriving one, fulfilling their purpose. +The bylaws are written to be consistent with the mission of the TUs, +and to ensure that TUs continue to be *Trusted* in the future. They +are also written with the intent to keep the TU organization a +thriving one, fulfilling its purpose. Standard Voting Procedure ------------------------- @@ -35,31 +35,28 @@ accept or reject proposals regarding TU affairs. SVP begins with a proposal, for example the addition of a TU or an amendment to the bylaws. The proposal should be clear and concise and it must be posted on -the aur-general mailing list (aur-general). The proposal must also be worded -unambiguously, and such that a YES or NO answer may be given. +the https://mailman.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/aur-general[aur-general +mailing list] (aur-general). The proposal must also be worded unambiguously, +such that a YES or NO answer may be given. -The discussion period begins when the proposal is posted on aur-general. The +The discussion period begins when the proposal is posted on +https://mailman.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/aur-general[aur-general]. The duration of the discussion period shall be 5 full days UNLESS otherwise stated -in a section of the bylaws pertaining to the proposal. Official discussion -shall take place on aur-general. During the discussion period, votes shall not -be cast. +in a section of the bylaws pertaining to the proposal. Official discussion shall +take place on +https://mailman.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/aur-general[aur-general]. During +the discussion period, votes shall not be cast. The voting period begins when the discussion period ends. The duration of the voting period shall be 7 full days UNLESS otherwise stated in a section of the bylaws pertaining to the proposal. During the voting period, TUs may vote YES, -NO or ABSTAIN. Votes shall be cast under the Trusted User section of the AUR -homepage. At the end of the voting period, all votes shall be tallied. - -In the context of SVP, TUs are considered active if they are marked as active -when the voting period ends. - -Quorum shall be 66% of all active TUs and participation shall be measured by -the sum of YES, NO and ABSTAIN votes, UNLESS otherwise stated in a section of -the bylaws pertaining to the proposal. +NO or ABSTAIN. Votes shall be cast under the Trusted User section of the +https://aur.archlinux.org/[AUR website]. At the end of the voting period, all +votes shall be tallied. The proposal is accepted if EITHER -1. the number of YES votes is greater than half the number of active TUs OR +1. the number of YES votes is greater than half the number of TUs OR 2. quorum has been established and the number of YES votes is greater than the number of NO votes @@ -68,11 +65,10 @@ UNLESS otherwise stated in a section of the bylaws pertaining to the proposal. The proposal is rejected if EITHER -1. the number of NO votes is greater than or equal to half the number of active -TUs OR +1. the number of NO votes is greater than or equal to half the number of TUs OR -2. quorum was established and the number of NO votes is greater than or equal -to the number of YES votes +2. quorum has been established and the number of NO votes is greater than or +equal to the number of YES votes UNLESS otherwise stated in a section of the bylaws pertaining to the proposal. @@ -90,47 +86,20 @@ second SVP then it shall be rejected. Quorum ------ -This section deals with quorums, and the consequences for those that repeatedly -keep the group from meeting them. - -Quorums were established to make sure that all TUs are having a say in the -matters that they vote on, and to ensure that TUs remain active in the job that -they have taken on. All active TUs should be participating in discussions and -voting procedures in order to continue meeting the quorums. For this reason, -active TUs that keep quorum from being established on a voting procedure for -three consecutive voting procedures (they need not be on the same motion) are -automatically brought up for removal procedure, by reason of unwarranted -inactivity. - -Active vs. Inactive -------------------- - -A Trusted User will have an activity status at all times. Only two statuses -exist, +active+, and +inactive+. A TU should remain active whenever possible, -and avoid being inactive, especially without declaring it. - -An active TU participates in all TU tasks and activities normally. - -A TU may declare themselves inactive, for instance if they are going on -vacation, by sending a message to -https://mailman.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/aur-general[aur-general]. TUs -are expected to step down altogether if they plan on becoming inactive for a -period longer than 2 months. It is expected that while inactive, a TU is -unable to maintain packages and partake in normal TU activities. They are -exempt from quorums and in fact cannot vote. A TU becomes active again at the -stated date on their original inactivity declaration, or when they declare -themselves such. +Quorums ensure that all matters decided by vote are representative of the TU +group. All TUs are expected to participate in all votes and the preceding +discussions whenever possible. -If a TU becomes inactive without declaring it, "disappears", someone must -motion for their removal for reason of unwarranted and undeclared inactivity, -and the normal procedure for the motion is followed. +Quorum shall be 66% of all TUs and participation shall be measured by +the sum of YES, NO and ABSTAIN votes, UNLESS otherwise stated in a section of +the bylaws pertaining to the proposal. Addition of a TU ---------------- -The addition of a Trusted User may occur at any time. +The addition of a TU may occur at any time. -In order to become a Trusted User, one must first find a sponsoring active TU, +In order to become a TU, one must first find a sponsoring TU, and arrange privately with them to announce their candidacy on the https://mailman.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/aur-general[aur-general] mailing list. Following the announcement, standard voting procedure commences with a @@ -146,32 +115,46 @@ User for a period of three months. Removal of a TU --------------- -The removal of a Trusted User may also occur at any time. +The removal of a TU may also occur at any time. -A motion must be made by at least two active Trusted Users for the removal of a -Trusted User. The motion must be sent to +A motion for the removal of a TU must be made by at least 2 TUs. The motion must +be sent to https://mailman.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/aur-general[aur-general], and -contain a detailed and valid reason that the TU in question should be removed. +contain a detailed and valid reason why the TU in question should be removed. Following the motion, standard voting procedure commences with a discussion -period of 7 days, a quorum of 75%, and a voting period of 7 days. +period of 7 days, a quorum of 75% of all TUs except for the TU being considered +for removal, and a voting period of 7 days. + ---- SVP( general_removal_of_TU, 7, 0.75, 7); ---- -The Trusted User brought up for removal may defend themselves during the -discussion period, but may not vote during the voting period, nor may they vote -on any other matters while SVP for their removal is in progress. +The TU brought up for removal may defend themselves during the +discussion period, but may not vote on the proposal. + + +Special Removal of an Inactive TU +~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ + +A TU who has not done ANY of the following for a period of at least 2 months: + +1. added, removed or updated a package in +[community]+ or the AUR + +2. performed any action that required TU privileges on the AUR + +3. posted a message to https://mailman.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/aur-general[aur-general] + +OR who has not voted in a consecutive series of voting periods, the starting dates +of which span 2 months or more, shall be brought up for special removal due to +inactivity. -There is one special case for removal, removal due to unwarranted and -undeclared inactivity, for which standard voting procedure deviates from the -above. This motion is also automatically triggered by repeated quorum offenses, -as described in the <<Q,Quorum>> subsection of this document. For this special -case, SVP is followed with a discussion period of three days, a quorum of 66%, -and a voting period of 5 days. +In this special case, the motion may be made by one TU instead of two, and SVP +is followed by a discussion period of 3 days, a quorum of 66%, and a voting +period of 5 days. ---- -SVP( inactivity_removal_of_TU, 3, 0.66, 5 ); +SVP( removal_of_inactive_TU, 3, 0.66, 5 ); ---- Amendment of Bylaws @@ -179,7 +162,7 @@ Amendment of Bylaws These bylaws may be amended at any time. -An active Trusted User must motion for an amendment by sending an announcement +A TU must motion for an amendment by sending an announcement to https://mailman.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/aur-general[aur-general]. The message must either contain, or have attached, a patch against this document which accomplishes the suggested change. SVP is commenced at the time @@ -190,5 +173,5 @@ voting period of 7 days. SVP( amend_bylaws, 5, 0.75, 7); ---- -If the amendment fails, the same amendment may not be motioned for for a period +If the amendment fails, the same amendment may not be motioned for a period of three weeks. -- 1.8.3.4
On 11 August 2013 18:29, Xyne <xyne@archlinux.ca> wrote:
The current by-laws try to automate a process that requires human discretion. This version retains automation for extreme cases and relies on human discretion for the rest.
Alright, this justifies those changes. Good to go on the rest, AFAICS. -- GPG/PGP ID: C0711BF1
On Sun, Aug 11, 2013 at 10:29:42AM +0000, Xyne wrote:
[...] Patch follows:
I put that patch on a separate branch (proposal-70) in the official TU bylaws repository [1], so that it is easier for people to extract the actual commit and review the changes in the way they prefer. I think it is a good idea to include both the discussion and a link to the proposal branch in the AUR proposal description. Xyne, could you please remember this when the voting period starts? I think we should also update the bylaws and complete the "Amendment of Bylaws" section with instructions on how to submit future proposals. Mention the Git repository, mention `git send-email`. Mention that every proposal will be merged into a separate branch so that TUs can easily review the latest version when voting. I will submit a proposal after the end of the voting period for this one. [1] https://projects.archlinux.org/tu-bylaws.git/?h=proposal-70
Hi, The discussion period has ended. Please cast your votes: https://aur.archlinux.org/tu/?id=70 Regards, Xyne
On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 03:15:27PM +0000, Xyne wrote:
Hi,
The discussion period has ended. Please cast your votes: https://aur.archlinux.org/tu/?id=70
I know that it is a bit late for comments on the proposal but I just noticed that your patch doesn't seem to change the sentence mentioning that TUs are counted at the end of a vote. Is that intentional or did you just miss that? Also, I just wondered whether it is okay to accept a proposal before the voting period ends? Currently, there are 19 yes votes, 37 TUs and there is no way the number of TUs can increase until the end of the proposal.
Regards, Xyne
On 16.08.2013 11:00, Lukas Fleischer wrote:
Also, I just wondered whether it is okay to accept a proposal before the voting period ends? Currently, there are 19 yes votes, 37 TUs and there is no way the number of TUs can increase until the end of the proposal.
No, people should be allowed to vote no if they feel the change is wrong just for the sake of letting the others know. (IMHO) I'm not sure if we have any rule about that though. In case you can't find one assume we can't accept it before the end.
On 2013-08-16 11:00 +0200 Lukas Fleischer wrote:
On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 03:15:27PM +0000, Xyne wrote:
Hi,
The discussion period has ended. Please cast your votes: https://aur.archlinux.org/tu/?id=70
I know that it is a bit late for comments on the proposal but I just noticed that your patch doesn't seem to change the sentence mentioning that TUs are counted at the end of a vote. Is that intentional or did you just miss that?
I did indeed forget to add a statement that TUs should be counted at the beginning of the voting period. I can't find any clause that states the quorum is counted at the end, only participation. I suggest the following additional change, which adds a clause to the SVP section and patches the current Quorum section:
Only those TUs who are counted towards quorum may participate in the vote.
[[Q]] Quorum ------
Quorums ensure that all matters decided by vote are representative of the TU group. All TUs are expected to participate in all votes and the preceding discussions whenever possible.
Quorum shall be 66% of all TUs at the start of the voting period and participation shall be measured by the sum of YES, NO and ABSTAIN votes, UNLESS otherwise stated in a section of the bylaws pertaining to the proposal.
Given that this was part of the discussion I doubt that anyone who voted yes would object to the changes, but I do not know how to proceed. On 2013-08-16 13:10 +0200 Florian Pritz wrote:
On 16.08.2013 11:00, Lukas Fleischer wrote:
Also, I just wondered whether it is okay to accept a proposal before the voting period ends? Currently, there are 19 yes votes, 37 TUs and there is no way the number of TUs can increase until the end of the proposal.
No, people should be allowed to vote no if they feel the change is wrong just for the sake of letting the others know. (IMHO)
I'm not sure if we have any rule about that though. In case you can't find one assume we can't accept it before the end.
We have encountered this situation before. The consensus was that it is better to wait and let everyone cast their vote, even if acceptance is guaranteed. By our own bylaws, the votes are tallied at the end of the voting period anyway. Regards, Xyne
The proposed changes have been accepted. Final tally: yes: 27 no: 0 abstain: 4
On 9 August 2013 13:29, Xyne <xyne@archlinux.ca> wrote:
Hi,
Here's a patch for the TU-bylaws that resulted from discussion in the previous thread:
I can't obviously comment on grammar as I'm not a native speaker, so I have just a single comment. I think it may be better to split this into two commits, one containing the little changes like referring to trusted users as TUs or explicitly mentioning the aur-general and the other one containing the recently discussed changes regarding the voting procedure and TU removal. Lukas
Lukas Jirkovsky wrote:
I can't obviously comment on grammar as I'm not a native speaker, so I have just a single comment. I think it may be better to split this into two commits, one containing the little changes like referring to trusted users as TUs or explicitly mentioning the aur-general and the other one containing the recently discussed changes regarding the voting procedure and TU removal.
I have considered that but at this point it would just require more work for no real benefit. I would prefer to leave the proposal as-is. If it is rejected then I or someone else can extract the linguistic changes. Regards, Xyne
participants (5)
-
Florian Pritz
-
Lukas Fleischer
-
Lukas Jirkovsky
-
Rashif Ray Rahman
-
Xyne