[aur-general] REMOVAL: xterminus

[Aaron Griffin]

On Dec 20, 2007 10:38 AM, Callan Barrett <wizzomafizzo at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Dec 21, 2007 1:10 AM,  <w9ya at qrparci.net> wrote:
> > IF the by-laws cannot or will not be interpreted this way, then I suggest
> > we change them so that we can have inactive tu s without removing them
> > altogether.
>
> Exactly what you described is in the bylaws. A TU can be inactive for
> a maximum of 2 months WITH explanation, xterminus has disappeared
> without any such explanation and so should not be applied to that rule
> anyway so there's no reason for him to be marked "inactive
> indefinitely" (this status does not exist and should never exist by
> the way). I think changing the bylaws is a terrible way to deal with
> this as xterminus would be free (and I imagine welcomed) to reapply as
> a TU *if* he returns.

For the record, he _is_ incommunicado. I have tried to contact him
numerous times over... the past 3 or 4 months maybe. I think Jeff
actually had some luck, but he has attempted the same