[aur-general] Circle that A
louipc.ist at gmail.com
Thu Dec 4 11:55:18 EST 2008
On Thu, Dec 04, 2008 at 05:58:47AM -0700, w9ya wrote:
> In short you really have not earned the trust you seek. If this proposal in
> fact passes, it will be in spite of your lack of candor and truthfulness.
I have been honest and I've tried to provide you with data. You, on the
other hand, have made wild claims about the proposal ruining the system,
etcetera. You have provided no data, and no proof for your claims.
If anything you are the one being dishonest.
Why don't you be honest about the fact that you never gave this proposal
a chance? Your first protests were not about us being dishonest or about
there being no need for increased server resources. They were about the
claim that the TU system never held any value in votes before. That you
were *promised* votes would never mean anything.
When I look back in the mailing list archives to January I can see
the same fanatical mania from you.
> And remember that ANY time to make things more specific and rigid, you
> WILL have unintended consequences and worse a real chance for blow-back
> affecting you personally. It certainly will make the TU position less
> attractive to request and THEN we ALL suffer.
Quite a prophecy. Again, no evidence to your claims.
> > No one ever said that this idea was the only good idea. There is
> > definitely room for more ideas. There is more to be done.
> Could you please take a moment to fill us in on what other things you feel
> needs "to be done" ?
They've been said already but here are some for you:
1. Clean up [community].
2. Improve community scripts.
3. Move the repo to a faster SCM.
More information about the aur-general