[aur-general] Enforcing TU Bylaws

[w9ya at qrparci.net]

Um, never mind.... I sometimes read my mail backwards, and I got to the
mail in question.

Very best regards;

Bob Finch


> Exactly whom are we speaking about ?
>
> Bob Finch
>
>
>> 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


Liviu Librescu - În veci pomenirea lui.
(May his memory be eternal.)