[aur-general] Enforcing TU Bylaws
wizzomafizzo at gmail.com
Tue Dec 18 20:28:13 EST 2007
On Dec 19, 2007 10:17 AM, Alessio 'mOLOk' Bolognino
<themolok.ml at gmail.com> wrote:
> FYI Encelo flagged himself as Inactive long time ago.
> ( http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Trusted_Users#encelo )
Thanks, didn't see that when I checked.
> I think we should open a "ping thread" were TUs must reply in say, 2 weeks,
> otherwise they will be flagged as Inactive (!= Removed).
I agree with a ping thread, I disagree with TUs not being removed.
Some of these people have been gone for months and it's supposed to be
the rules (even if Simo says over and over he hates the bylaws) that
they're removed even if they're marked inactive. Inactive might be ok
for a while but eventually people will need to be pruned off.
As for the "ping thread", this will probably work for those 4 listed
as candidates for removal but it still is no good for those who are
being lazy in their votes. It's time to stop being so wishy-washy
about being a TU and give some poke to stop being lazy. If you can't
handle being a TU all the time (not counting people who notify of
their absence) don't be one at all.
Callan 'wizzomafizzo' Barrett
More information about the aur-general