[aur-general] Enforcing TU Bylaws

Callan Barrett wizzomafizzo at gmail.com
Wed Dec 19 23:14:01 EST 2007

On Dec 20, 2007 4:01 AM, Travis Willard <travis at archlinux.org> wrote:
> However, seeing as how this is an elected volunteer position, the
> dynamic is different - you won't get 'fired' as a TU for only
> maintaining packages and never voting, for instance, although that
> seems to be what the original starter of the thread would like to
> start as a policy.  It's been a while since I've read the bylaws, so I
> have no idea of whether it explicitly states that TUs have to vote,
> but I'd be surprised if that isn't the case, since quorum is expected.

The TU bylaws are basically all about voting, the actual maintaining
of packages isn't really even mentioned in them. I want the bylaws
enforced because currently too many people are considered active but
also don't think they need to vote which has, as you can see, been
putting the votes under quorum. I think this is also the first time
we've ever been under quorum in a vote, that's why it's now a real

When I started this thread I never wanted any TUs removed (except for
the ones who are actually completely gone), I wanted people to get a
clue that they're giving a half-assed (because that's what it is, not
"half a TU is better than none") effort towards a job they volunteered
for and said every time before they were sponsored that they would do
it to the best of their ability. If you can't do your job properly,
whether it's a pay job or not, then you shouldn't do it at all, this
is a big project and I'm sure there are plenty of other people willing
to replace you.

For the people who are now declaring themselves as inactive now can
you please also keep in mind that should be no longer than two months
and could you please make a separate thread regarding it?

Callan 'wizzomafizzo' Barrett

More information about the aur-general mailing list