[aur-general] voting period for Dave Reisner
Hi, the 5 days discussion period have ended. http://aur.archlinux.org/tu.php?id=42 -- Ionuț
On 12/04/2010 07:29 PM, Ionuț Bîru wrote:
Hi,
the 5 days discussion period have ended.
42! -- freenode/pyropeter "12:50 - Ich drücke Return."
On 05.12.2010 01:39, PyroPeter wrote:
On 12/04/2010 07:29 PM, Ionuț Bîru wrote:
Hi,
the 5 days discussion period have ended.
42!
1.40500612 × 10^51
On Sun, Dec 05, 2010 at 01:39:13AM +0100, PyroPeter wrote:
On 12/04/2010 07:29 PM, Ionuț Bîru wrote:
Hi,
the 5 days discussion period have ended.
42!
Yup, that's right. 42. Vote wisely, gentlemen. We may very well unfold the meaning of life here.
On Sat, Dec 4, 2010 at 7:54 PM, Dave Reisner <d@falconindy.com> wrote:
On Sun, Dec 05, 2010 at 01:39:13AM +0100, PyroPeter wrote:
On 12/04/2010 07:29 PM, Ionuț Bîru wrote:
Hi,
the 5 days discussion period have ended.
42!
Yup, that's right. 42. Vote wisely, gentlemen. We may very well unfold the meaning of life here.
This is sort of what I was talking about in my previous mail about the refinement of the bylaws. Thirteen hours have passed since the beginning of the voting period and at this point according to this page: https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Trusted_Users There are thirty Trusted Users. Seventeen yay's have been cast and a simple majority has already been reached. We should amend the bylaws such that the voting period may end because no amount of nay's can change the outcome of the vote at this point. There is no reason for falconindy to wait another seven days to receive his Trusted User privileges. --Kaiting. -- Kiwis and Limes: http://kaitocracy.blogspot.com/
17/30 does not make a 66% quorum, so yes, the motion could still fail. On Sun, Dec 5, 2010 at 3:07 AM, Kaiting Chen <kaitocracy@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, Dec 4, 2010 at 7:54 PM, Dave Reisner <d@falconindy.com> wrote:
On Sun, Dec 05, 2010 at 01:39:13AM +0100, PyroPeter wrote:
On 12/04/2010 07:29 PM, Ionuț Bîru wrote:
Hi,
the 5 days discussion period have ended.
42!
Yup, that's right. 42. Vote wisely, gentlemen. We may very well unfold the meaning of life here.
This is sort of what I was talking about in my previous mail about the refinement of the bylaws. Thirteen hours have passed since the beginning of the voting period and at this point according to this page:
https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Trusted_Users
There are thirty Trusted Users. Seventeen yay's have been cast and a simple majority has already been reached. We should amend the bylaws such that the voting period may end because no amount of nay's can change the outcome of the vote at this point. There is no reason for falconindy to wait another seven days to receive his Trusted User privileges. --Kaiting.
-- Kiwis and Limes: http://kaitocracy.blogspot.com/
On Sun 05 Dec 2010 08:19 -0500, Shacristo wrote:
On Sun, Dec 5, 2010 at 3:07 AM, Kaiting Chen <kaitocracy@gmail.com> wrote:
This is sort of what I was talking about in my previous mail about the refinement of the bylaws. Thirteen hours have passed since the beginning of the voting period and at this point according to this page:
https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Trusted_Users
There are thirty Trusted Users. Seventeen yay's have been cast and a simple majority has already been reached. We should amend the bylaws such that the voting period may end because no amount of nay's can change the outcome of the vote at this point. There is no reason for falconindy to wait another seven days to receive his Trusted User privileges. --Kaiting.
17/30 does not make a 66% quorum, so yes, the motion could still fail.
Kaiting is saying that even though quorum hasn't been met, that it's impossible for the vote to fail on the basis of opposition. If the rest of the TUs voted nay, then it would be 17 aye vs 13 nay which would still be a majority for the motion. How do they do it in real life if quorum isn't met, but support for the motion is enough that it shouldn't really matter.
Loui Chang wrote:
On Sun 05 Dec 2010 08:19 -0500, Shacristo wrote:
On Sun, Dec 5, 2010 at 3:07 AM, Kaiting Chen <kaitocracy@gmail.com> wrote:
This is sort of what I was talking about in my previous mail about the refinement of the bylaws. Thirteen hours have passed since the beginning of the voting period and at this point according to this page:
https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Trusted_Users
There are thirty Trusted Users. Seventeen yay's have been cast and a simple majority has already been reached. We should amend the bylaws such that the voting period may end because no amount of nay's can change the outcome of the vote at this point. There is no reason for falconindy to wait another seven days to receive his Trusted User privileges. --Kaiting.
17/30 does not make a 66% quorum, so yes, the motion could still fail.
Kaiting is saying that even though quorum hasn't been met, that it's impossible for the vote to fail on the basis of opposition.
If the rest of the TUs voted nay, then it would be 17 aye vs 13 nay which would still be a majority for the motion.
How do they do it in real life if quorum isn't met, but support for the motion is enough that it shouldn't really matter.
If quorum is required then the motion would still fail in that case. Quorum really just prevents votes from passing with low participation, e.g. 5 participate and 3 vote yes... that would be a simple majority but clearly not enough people to carry any real weight. We could amend the bylaws to state that quorum is not required if an absolute majority has voted to pass the motion (an absolute majority being more than half of all active TUs). I think that makes sense because as it stands now, voting against the motion or simply abstaining is completely meaningless. If one were opposed to the motion, it would be more beneficial to simply not vote at all and to hope that others do the same so that quorum cannot be established. That actually applies in general to our application voting system. If you're against the application, it would be more effective to simply not vote, which seems wrong to me. Voting against the application should have some meaningful effect and thus be different from abstaining. I wouldn't mind having some extra clause that stipulates e.g. (#yes - #no)/#total >= x. The reasoning is that even with a simple majority, if a large portion of the team is against an application then it may be disruptive to accept it. I realize that the argument against this will be that it isn't KISS and I'm not really bothered about it either way. I'm just floating the idea. Btw, I actually think it would make sense to have a script that accepts the number of active TUs, and the number of votes to determine the outcome. It would be completely unambiguous and amusingly geeky. It could also be tracked with Git. ;)
We could amend the bylaws to state that quorum is not required if an absolute majority has voted to pass the motion (an absolute majority being more than half of all active TUs). I think that makes sense because as it stands now, voting against the motion or simply abstaining is completely meaningless. If one were opposed to the motion, it would be more beneficial to simply not vote at all and to hope that others do the same so that quorum cannot be established.
This is basically what I've been spamming aur-general with. I did some research today and it appears that what you are talking about actually does happen. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quorum When a vote is decided, politicians will sometimes abuse the quorum system to try to manipulate the result. --Kaiting. -- Kiwis and Limes: http://kaitocracy.blogspot.com/
On Sun, Dec 5, 2010 at 1:31 PM, Kaiting Chen <kaitocracy@gmail.com> wrote:
We could amend the bylaws to state that quorum is not required if an absolute majority has voted to pass the motion (an absolute majority being more than half of all active TUs). I think that makes sense because as it stands now, voting against the motion or simply abstaining is completely meaningless. If one were opposed to the motion, it would be more beneficial to simply not vote at all and to hope that others do the same so that quorum cannot be established.
This is basically what I've been spamming aur-general with. I did some research today and it appears that what you are talking about actually does happen.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quorum
When a vote is decided, politicians will sometimes abuse the quorum system to try to manipulate the result. --Kaiting.
-- Kiwis and Limes: http://kaitocracy.blogspot.com/
Isn't this why the automatic motion for removal exists? If a TU abuses the quorum system he could be removed for inactivity.
On 12/05/2010 02:54 AM, Dave Reisner wrote:
On Sun, Dec 05, 2010 at 01:39:13AM +0100, PyroPeter wrote:
On 12/04/2010 07:29 PM, Ionuț Bîru wrote:
Hi,
the 5 days discussion period have ended.
42!
Yup, that's right. 42. Vote wisely, gentlemen. We may very well unfold the meaning of life here.
good news. This is the first time, since i'm a TU, when we reached 100% quorum. yes 29 no 0 abstain 1 Welcome in our team. Todo: https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/AUR_Trusted_User_Guidelines#TODO_list_f... -- Ionuț
On Sat, Dec 11, 2010 at 10:05:42PM +0200, Ionuț Bîru wrote:
On 12/05/2010 02:54 AM, Dave Reisner wrote:
On Sun, Dec 05, 2010 at 01:39:13AM +0100, PyroPeter wrote:
On 12/04/2010 07:29 PM, Ionuț Bîru wrote:
Hi,
the 5 days discussion period have ended.
42!
Yup, that's right. 42. Vote wisely, gentlemen. We may very well unfold the meaning of life here.
good news. This is the first time, since i'm a TU, when we reached 100% quorum.
yes 29 no 0 abstain 1
Welcome in our team.
Todo: https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/AUR_Trusted_User_Guidelines#TODO_list_f...
-- Ionuț
Wow! I'm just going to play dumb and assume that the high voter turnout was because of all the discussion regarding reform of SVP. Thanks for this opportunity, I'm really looking forward to being a part of the community. dave
On Sat, 11 Dec 2010 15:21:53 -0500 Dave Reisner <d@falconindy.com> wrote:
On Sat, Dec 11, 2010 at 10:05:42PM +0200, Ionuț Bîru wrote:
On 12/05/2010 02:54 AM, Dave Reisner wrote:
On Sun, Dec 05, 2010 at 01:39:13AM +0100, PyroPeter wrote:
On 12/04/2010 07:29 PM, Ionuț Bîru wrote:
Hi,
the 5 days discussion period have ended.
42!
Yup, that's right. 42. Vote wisely, gentlemen. We may very well unfold the meaning of life here.
good news. This is the first time, since i'm a TU, when we reached 100% quorum.
yes 29 no 0 abstain 1
Welcome in our team.
Todo: https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/AUR_Trusted_User_Guidelines#TODO_list_f...
-- Ionuț
Wow! I'm just going to play dumb and assume that the high voter turnout was because of all the discussion regarding reform of SVP. Thanks for this opportunity, I'm really looking forward to being a part of the community.
dave
Welcome to the team, and no it was because of the answer Ionuț gave us at the end of his mail, after all, we all know that we always have to take towels with us when we're about to leave the house. ;-) -- Jabber: atsutane@freethoughts.de Blog: http://atsutane.freethoughts.de/ Key: 295AFBF4 FP: 39F8 80E5 0E49 A4D1 1341 E8F9 39E4 F17F 295A FBF4
On Saturday 11 December 2010 20:21:53 Dave Reisner wrote:
yes 29 no 0 abstain 1
Welcome in our team.
Todo: https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/AUR_Trusted_User_Guidelines#TODO_lis t_for_new_Trusted_Users
Wow! I'm just going to play dumb and assume that the high voter turnout was because of all the discussion regarding reform of SVP. Thanks for this opportunity, I'm really looking forward to being a part of the community.
Congratulations Dave! Welcome :-)
On 12 December 2010 04:05, Ionuț Bîru <ibiru@archlinux.org> wrote:
good news. This is the first time, since i'm a TU, when we reached 100% quorum.
First time in the history of the AUR as we know it. Congrats and welcome!
On 2010-12-12 05:18 +0800 (49:7) Ray Rashif wrote:
On 12 December 2010 04:05, Ionuț Bîru <ibiru@archlinux.org> wrote:
good news. This is the first time, since i'm a TU, when we reached 100% quorum.
First time in the history of the AUR as we know it. Congrats and welcome!
42!
Yup, that's right. 42. Vote wisely, gentlemen. We may very well unfold the meaning of life here.
yes 29 no 0 abstain 1
42 indeed. I hope that the abstainer hasn't doomed us all with his doubt. Repent, oh ye of little faith! The chosen one now walks the AUR! He shall cast out the impure packages and smite their maintainers! No packages shall enter into [community] but through him! We live in the time of legend. The might of the chosen one shall free us from the dark shadow of the overlord's tyranny. He trembles in his basement fortress at this very moment, for he knows the end times are upon us and that not even Allan, Breaker of Worlds, may save him from his fate. Glory awaits us, my TU brethren! Now on with the show! * gets out some snacks and sits down in his designated TU comfy-chair *
On Sat, Dec 11, 2010 at 9:41 PM, Xyne <xyne@archlinux.ca> wrote:
* gets out some snacks and sits down in his designated TU comfy-chair *
Oh man that's a great idea. Why don't I have a designated TU comfy-chair? Welcome to the team Dave. --Kaiting. -- Kiwis and Limes: http://kaitocracy.blogspot.com/
Le samedi 11 décembre 2010 21:05:42, Ionuț Bîru a écrit :
On 12/05/2010 02:54 AM, Dave Reisner wrote:
On Sun, Dec 05, 2010 at 01:39:13AM +0100, PyroPeter wrote:
On 12/04/2010 07:29 PM, Ionuț Bîru wrote:
Hi,
the 5 days discussion period have ended.
42!
Yup, that's right. 42. Vote wisely, gentlemen. We may very well unfold the meaning of life here.
good news. This is the first time, since i'm a TU, when we reached 100% quorum.
yes 29 no 0 abstain 1
Welcome in our team.
Todo: https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/AUR_Trusted_User_Guidelines#TODO_list_ for_new_Trusted_Users
Welcome Dave!
On 11 December 2010 21:05, Ionuț Bîru <ibiru@archlinux.org> wrote:
On 12/05/2010 02:54 AM, Dave Reisner wrote:
On Sun, Dec 05, 2010 at 01:39:13AM +0100, PyroPeter wrote:
On 12/04/2010 07:29 PM, Ionuț Bîru wrote:
Hi,
the 5 days discussion period have ended.
42!
Yup, that's right. 42. Vote wisely, gentlemen. We may very well unfold the meaning of life here.
good news. This is the first time, since i'm a TU, when we reached 100% quorum.
yes 29 no 0 abstain 1
Welcome in our team.
Todo: https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/AUR_Trusted_User_Guidelines#TODO_list_f...
-- Ionuț
Welcome in the team Dave!
On 11.12.2010 21:05, Ionuț Bîru wrote:
On 12/05/2010 02:54 AM, Dave Reisner wrote:
On Sun, Dec 05, 2010 at 01:39:13AM +0100, PyroPeter wrote:
On 12/04/2010 07:29 PM, Ionuț Bîru wrote:
Hi,
the 5 days discussion period have ended.
42!
Yup, that's right. 42. Vote wisely, gentlemen. We may very well unfold the meaning of life here.
good news. This is the first time, since i'm a TU, when we reached 100% quorum.
yes 29 no 0 abstain 1
Welcome in our team.
Welcome and good job reaching 100% ;) -- Florian Pritz -- {flo,bluewind}@server-speed.net
On Sun, Dec 12, 2010 at 10:31 AM, Florian Pritz <bluewind@server-speed.net>wrote:
Welcome and good job reaching 100% ;)
-- Florian Pritz -- {flo,bluewind}@server-speed.net<bluewind%7D@server-speed.net>
Now let's get OVER 9000 !!! What !? Can't be done ? -- Cédric Girard
participants (15)
-
Cédric Girard
-
Dave Reisner
-
Florian Pritz
-
Ionuț Bîru
-
Kaiting Chen
-
Laurent Carlier
-
Loui Chang
-
Lukáš Jirkovský
-
Peter Lewis
-
PyroPeter
-
Ray Rashif
-
Shacristo
-
Sven-Hendrik Haase
-
Thorsten Töpper
-
Xyne