This message marks the beginning of the voting period for Brad Fanella's application to become a trusted user. You may read his application via this link: http://mailman.archlinux.org/pipermail/aur-general/2010-August/010049.html.
Good luck, Brad.
-- Chris
On Thu, Aug 26, 2010 at 2:16 PM, Christopher Brannon cmbrannon79@gmail.com wrote:
This message marks the beginning of the voting period for Brad Fanella's application to become a trusted user. You may read his application via this link: http://mailman.archlinux.org/pipermail/aur-general/2010-August/010049.html.
Good luck, Brad.
-- Chris
I like his attitude after asking him a couple of questions. +1 from me.
Christopher Brannon cmbrannon79@gmail.com writes:
This message marks the beginning of the voting period for Brad Fanella's application to become a trusted user.
Votes: yes = 14, no = 2, abstain = 5. Quorum was reached, and the application was accepted. Please welcome Brad Fanella, our newest Trusted User.
Brad, please read the following document: http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/AUR_Trusted_User_Guidelines. It contains a list of tasks which every new TU must complete. If you have not already done so, familiarize yourself with our bylaws: http://aur.archlinux.org/trusted-user/TUbylaws.html.
Welcome to the team!
-- Chris
On Thu, 02 Sep 2010 15:43:46 -0500 Christopher Brannon cmbrannon79@gmail.com wrote:
Christopher Brannon cmbrannon79@gmail.com writes:
This message marks the beginning of the voting period for Brad Fanella's application to become a trusted user.
Votes: yes = 14, no = 2, abstain = 5. Quorum was reached, and the application was accepted. Please welcome Brad Fanella, our newest Trusted User.
Brad, please read the following document: http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/AUR_Trusted_User_Guidelines. It contains a list of tasks which every new TU must complete. If you have not already done so, familiarize yourself with our bylaws: http://aur.archlinux.org/trusted-user/TUbylaws.html.
Welcome to the team!
-- Chris
Welcome to the team, I've set your AUR Account to Trusted User.
----- Original message -----
Welcome to the team, I've set your AUR Account to Trusted User.
Forum and flyspray accounts updated. Welcome aboard!
On Thu, 2010-09-02 at 15:43 -0500, Christopher Brannon wrote:
Christopher Brannon cmbrannon79@gmail.com writes:
This message marks the beginning of the voting period for Brad Fanella's application to become a trusted user.
Votes: yes = 14, no = 2, abstain = 5.
Out of curiosity, has anyone who's reached the voting period ever failed to get the majority of yes votes?
Just a 'historical'-type query, idle curiosity on a holiday.
2010/9/2 Ng Oon-Ee ngoonee@gmail.com:
On Thu, 2010-09-02 at 15:43 -0500, Christopher Brannon wrote:
Christopher Brannon cmbrannon79@gmail.com writes:
This message marks the beginning of the voting period for Brad Fanella's application to become a trusted user.
Votes: yes = 14, no = 2, abstain = 5.
Out of curiosity, has anyone who's reached the voting period ever failed to get the majority of yes votes?
Just a 'historical'-type query, idle curiosity on a holiday.
There was a guy that recently tried to help out as a TU, but he needed more experience and know-how, he wasn't lacking in motivation or cause though. He didn't officially apply though.
On Thu, 2010-09-02 at 20:10 -0500, Thomas Dziedzic wrote:
2010/9/2 Ng Oon-Ee ngoonee@gmail.com:
On Thu, 2010-09-02 at 15:43 -0500, Christopher Brannon wrote:
Christopher Brannon cmbrannon79@gmail.com writes:
This message marks the beginning of the voting period for Brad Fanella's application to become a trusted user.
Votes: yes = 14, no = 2, abstain = 5.
Out of curiosity, has anyone who's reached the voting period ever failed to get the majority of yes votes?
Just a 'historical'-type query, idle curiosity on a holiday.
There was a guy that recently tried to help out as a TU, but he needed more experience and know-how, he wasn't lacking in motivation or cause though. He didn't officially apply though.
Well yes I remember that guy. I was more wondering about whether a vote has failed before.
Ng Oon-Ee ngoonee@gmail.com writes:
Well yes I remember that guy. I was more wondering about whether a vote has failed before.
Yes, more than once.
-- Chris
On Friday 03 September 2010 at 03:03 Christopher Brannon wrote:
Ng Oon-Ee ngoonee@gmail.com writes:
Well yes I remember that guy. I was more wondering about whether a vote has failed before.
Yes, more than once.
Democracy in action, eh? ;-) Congratulations Brad!
This just got me wondering - is there an ideal number of TUs that you want there to be? Should people just continue applying if they have the know-how and time, or else are there "enough" TUs at the moment? What's the feeling on that?
Cheers,
Peter.
Peter Lewis pete@muddygoat.org writes:
This just got me wondering - is there an ideal number of TUs that you want there to be? Should people just continue applying if they have the know-how and time, or else are there "enough" TUs at the moment? What's the feeling on that?
Have a look at this thread from the forums: https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=103250
More is better. The packages/TU ratio will decrease as the number of TUs increases, and it will be more likely that a TU uses the packages he or she maintains. If you want to be a TU, find a sponsor and apply.
-- Chris
On Fri 03 Sep 2010 05:24 -0500, Christopher Brannon wrote:
Peter Lewis pete@muddygoat.org writes:
This just got me wondering - is there an ideal number of TUs that you want there to be? Should people just continue applying if they have the know-how and time, or else are there "enough" TUs at the moment? What's the feeling on that?
Have a look at this thread from the forums: https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=103250
More is better. The packages/TU ratio will decrease as the number of TUs increases, and it will be more likely that a TU uses the packages he or she maintains. If you want to be a TU, find a sponsor and apply.
Such numbers and ratios are misleading, we have one TU maintaining over 800 packages, and that keeps growing. I think it was around 600 last year. Overall I'd say it's good to have more TUs though.
2010/9/3 Ng Oon-Ee ngoonee@gmail.com:
On Thu, 2010-09-02 at 20:10 -0500, Thomas Dziedzic wrote:
2010/9/2 Ng Oon-Ee ngoonee@gmail.com:
On Thu, 2010-09-02 at 15:43 -0500, Christopher Brannon wrote:
Christopher Brannon cmbrannon79@gmail.com writes:
This message marks the beginning of the voting period for Brad Fanella's application to become a trusted user.
Votes: yes = 14, no = 2, abstain = 5.
Out of curiosity, has anyone who's reached the voting period ever failed to get the majority of yes votes?
Just a 'historical'-type query, idle curiosity on a holiday.
There was a guy that recently tried to help out as a TU, but he needed more experience and know-how, he wasn't lacking in motivation or cause though. He didn't officially apply though.
Well yes I remember that guy. I was more wondering about whether a vote has failed before.
Yes. I can't find it right now but it certainly happened. IIRC it was some guy who just came to Arch Linux.
Lukas
Out of curiosity, has anyone who's reached the voting period ever failed to get the majority of yes votes?
Just a 'historical'-type query, idle curiosity on a holiday.
There was a guy that recently tried to help out as a TU, but he needed more experience and know-how, he wasn't lacking in motivation or cause though. He didn't officially apply though.
Well yes I remember that guy. I was more wondering about whether a vote has failed before.
Yes. I can't find it right now but it certainly happened. IIRC it was some guy who just came to Arch Linux.
Looking through past votes on the AUR, only 2 have failed to gain a majority. It's not a surprise though as 33% can be enough to pass (simple majority of quorum, i.e. > 0.66 * 0.5). That may well be by design and it seems to work well.
While we're on the subject of voting, what is the point of having both "no" and "abstain" if they amount to exactly the same thing? It would make more sense to simply have two options: "vote", which would mean you feel confident that the person would make a good TU, and "abstain", which would mean that you don't.
Don't worry, I'm not suggesting that we change it... I'm just floating the idea for the next time someone has to rewrite the interface. ;)
On Fri 03 Sep 2010 09:03 +0000, Xyne wrote:
Out of curiosity, has anyone who's reached the voting period ever failed to get the majority of yes votes?
Just a 'historical'-type query, idle curiosity on a holiday.
There was a guy that recently tried to help out as a TU, but he needed more experience and know-how, he wasn't lacking in motivation or cause though. He didn't officially apply though.
Well yes I remember that guy. I was more wondering about whether a vote has failed before.
Yes. I can't find it right now but it certainly happened. IIRC it was some guy who just came to Arch Linux.
Looking through past votes on the AUR, only 2 have failed to gain a majority. It's not a surprise though as 33% can be enough to pass (simple majority of quorum, i.e. > 0.66 * 0.5). That may well be by design and it seems to work well.
While we're on the subject of voting, what is the point of having both "no" and "abstain" if they amount to exactly the same thing? It would make more sense to simply have two options: "vote", which would mean you feel confident that the person would make a good TU, and "abstain", which would mean that you don't.
I had thought this at one point, but they actually don't amount to the same thing. An abstain vote counts for quorum but it doesn't count against the majority. As long as quorum is met a proposal could pass with one yes vote, and all the rest abstains, but it could not pass with one yes vote and all the rest no votes.
On Saturday 04 September 2010 at 17:59 Loui Chang wrote:
While we're on the subject of voting, what is the point of having both "no" and "abstain" if they amount to exactly the same thing? It would make more sense to simply have two options: "vote", which would mean you feel confident that the person would make a good TU, and "abstain", which would mean that you don't.
I had thought this at one point, but they actually don't amount to the same thing. An abstain vote counts for quorum but it doesn't count against the majority.
Absolutely - "abstain" is not the same as "no" or "yes". It can have the effect of either, depending on how everyone else votes. It can basically be seen as meaning (though some would disagree), "I'm here, I'm paying attention, I think there should be a decision on this, but I don't have a strong view so am happy to go with the majority".
Put like that, it's quite different from voting "no" or just not bothering to vote. In more complex decisions however, it can also be construed as "I'm not happy with any of the options presented to me, but I want you to know I care about this." In some systems, a majority of "abstain" would cause people to go back and revisit the question.
As long as quorum is met a proposal could pass with one yes vote, and all the rest abstains, but it could not pass with one yes vote and all the rest no votes.
Yep - or vice-versa.
Pete.
Loui Chang wrote:
I had thought this at one point, but they actually don't amount to the same thing. An abstain vote counts for quorum but it doesn't count against the majority. As long as quorum is met a proposal could pass with one yes vote, and all the rest abstains, but it could not pass with one yes vote and all the rest no votes.
Should a single "yes" vote really be enough to make someone a "trusted" user?
I understand the logic of the system but I think I would have opted for a system based on a threshold of confidence. Of course, you could argue that having the confidence of a single TU is enough.
Again, I'm not trying to change the system. I'm just discussing this for the sake of the discussion.
On Sun 05 Sep 2010 10:20 +0000, Xyne wrote:
Loui Chang wrote:
I had thought this at one point, but they actually don't amount to the same thing. An abstain vote counts for quorum but it doesn't count against the majority. As long as quorum is met a proposal could pass with one yes vote, and all the rest abstains, but it could not pass with one yes vote and all the rest no votes.
Should a single "yes" vote really be enough to make someone a "trusted" user?
If no one else cares to voice an opinion, then yes.
I understand the logic of the system but I think I would have opted for a system based on a threshold of confidence. Of course, you could argue that having the confidence of a single TU is enough.
On Monday 06 September 2010 at 01:39 Loui Chang wrote:
On Sun 05 Sep 2010 10:20 +0000, Xyne wrote:
Loui Chang wrote:
I had thought this at one point, but they actually don't amount to the same thing. An abstain vote counts for quorum but it doesn't count against the majority. As long as quorum is met a proposal could pass with one yes vote, and all the rest abstains, but it could not pass with one yes vote and all the rest no votes.
Should a single "yes" vote really be enough to make someone a "trusted" user?
If no one else cares to voice an opinion, then yes.
I suppose this would only happen if *no-one* voiced a "no" opinion, meaning that our definition of "trust" comes down to a question of burden of proof.
Should someone be required to have a minimum proportion of "yes" votes to be counted as "trusted" or should it be enough that no-one really thought that they weren't to be trusted?
Have there ever been any "betrayals" of trust? (i.e. has any TU ever abused privileges?)
Pete.
On 09/06/2010 10:54 PM, Peter Lewis wrote:
I suppose this would only happen if *no-one* voiced a "no" opinion, meaning that our definition of "trust" comes down to a question of burden of proof.
Should someone be required to have a minimum proportion of "yes" votes to be counted as "trusted" or should it be enough that no-one really thought that they weren't to be trusted?
If the other TU's would have been like "I don't care", they would have used the "abstain" option.
Question in matters of language: How do I merge the subjunctive mood and the negation into a grammatically correct sentence? "If the other TU's would not have cared, ..."?
Regards, PyroPeter
On 07.09.2010 19:59, PyroPeter wrote:
Question in matters of language: How do I merge the subjunctive mood and the negation into a grammatically correct sentence? "If the other TU's would not have cared, ..."?
"If they didn't care"
I'm not a native speaker so that could be completely wrong ;)
PyroPeter wrote:
If the other TU's would have been like "I don't care", they would have used the "abstain" option.
Question in matters of language: How do I merge the subjunctive mood and the negation into a grammatically correct sentence? "If the other TU's would not have cared, ..."?
Regards, PyroPeter
Using "have": "Had the other TUs not cared, they would have abstained." "If the other TUs hadn't cared, ..."
Compare: "Had I not been there, I would have been elsewhere." "If I hadn't been there, ..."
Using "do": "If they didn't care, they would have abstained".
Compare: "If I didn't know better, I would call him an idiot."
For a bit of logical completeness: Formulations such as "Did they not care, ..." might be correct in a strict sense but they would sound very wrong to most speakers, as though it were a question. "Cared they not, ..." might also be correct but it sounds archaic and unnatural (even though I would prefer it if we could drop the silly use of the auxiliary verb "do"... and re-introduce "thou" to match "du" and "tu" while we're at it).
"Cared thou not, thou would have abstained." ;)
On 09/07/2010 09:30 PM, Xyne wrote:
Using "have": "Had the other TUs not cared, they would have abstained." "If the other TUs hadn't cared, ..."
Compare: "Had I not been there, I would have been elsewhere." "If I hadn't been there, ..."
Using "do": "If they didn't care, they would have abstained".
Compare: "If I didn't know better, I would call him an idiot."
For a bit of logical completeness: Formulations such as "Did they not care, ..." might be correct in a strict sense but they would sound very wrong to most speakers, as though it were a question. "Cared they not, ..." might also be correct but it sounds archaic and unnatural (even though I would prefer it if we could drop the silly use of the auxiliary verb "do"... and re-introduce "thou" to match "du" and "tu" while we're at it).
"Cared thou not, thou would have abstained." ;)
Thanks for this comprehensive reply. According to wikipedia, "thou" is the 2nd person singular pronoun, and the plural form would be "Cared ye not, ye would have abstained."
Regards, PyroPeter
PyroPeter wrote:
For a bit of logical completeness: Formulations such as "Did they not care, ..." might be correct in a strict sense but they would sound very wrong to most speakers, as though it were a question. "Cared they not, ..." might also be correct but it sounds archaic and unnatural (even though I would prefer it if we could drop the silly use of the auxiliary verb "do"... and re-introduce "thou" to match "du" and "tu" while we're at it).
"Cared thou not, thou would have abstained." ;)
Thanks for this comprehensive reply. According to wikipedia, "thou" is the 2nd person singular pronoun, and the plural form would be "Cared ye not, ye would have abstained."
"Thou" is indeed the 2nd person singular pronoun, as is its counterpart "du" in Germanic languages and "tu" in Romance languages, which is why I mentioned them. I never implied otherwise.
On Thu, Sep 2, 2010 at 8:43 PM, Christopher Brannon cmbrannon79@gmail.comwrote:
Christopher Brannon cmbrannon79@gmail.com writes:
This message marks the beginning of the voting period for Brad Fanella's application to become a trusted user.
Votes: yes = 14, no = 2, abstain = 5. Quorum was reached, and the application was accepted. Please welcome Brad Fanella, our newest Trusted User.
Brad, please read the following document: http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/AUR_Trusted_User_Guidelines. It contains a list of tasks which every new TU must complete. If you have not already done so, familiarize yourself with our bylaws: http://aur.archlinux.org/trusted-user/TUbylaws.html.
Welcome to the team!
-- Chris
Thank you. I'm glad to have the chance to help out!
Thanks, Brad
Le Friday 03 September 2010 03:02:14, Brad Fanella a écrit :
On Thu, Sep 2, 2010 at 8:43 PM, Christopher Brannon
cmbrannon79@gmail.comwrote:
Christopher Brannon cmbrannon79@gmail.com writes:
This message marks the beginning of the voting period for Brad Fanella's application to become a trusted user.
Votes: yes = 14, no = 2, abstain = 5. Quorum was reached, and the application was accepted. Please welcome Brad Fanella, our newest Trusted User.
Brad, please read the following document: http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/AUR_Trusted_User_Guidelines. It contains a list of tasks which every new TU must complete. If you have not already done so, familiarize yourself with our bylaws: http://aur.archlinux.org/trusted-user/TUbylaws.html.
Welcome to the team!
-- Chris
Thank you. I'm glad to have the chance to help out!
Thanks, Brad
Welcome Brad!
On Thu, Sep 2, 2010 at 10:43 PM, Christopher Brannon cmbrannon79@gmail.com wrote:
Christopher Brannon cmbrannon79@gmail.com writes:
This message marks the beginning of the voting period for Brad Fanella's application to become a trusted user.
Votes: yes = 14, no = 2, abstain = 5. Quorum was reached, and the application was accepted. Please welcome Brad Fanella, our newest Trusted User.
Brad, please read the following document: http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/AUR_Trusted_User_Guidelines. It contains a list of tasks which every new TU must complete. If you have not already done so, familiarize yourself with our bylaws: http://aur.archlinux.org/trusted-user/TUbylaws.html.
Welcome to the team!
-- Chris
Welcome!
I completely forgot to write welcome.
Welcome to the team!
aur-general@lists.archlinux.org