[aur-general] Circle that A

w9ya w9ya at qrparci.net
Thu Dec 4 13:40:14 EST 2008

On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 11:18 AM, Loui Chang <louipc.ist at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Thu, Dec 04, 2008 at 10:47:24AM -0700, w9ya wrote:
> > Well IF you go back far enough into the mail archives (which may NOT be
> > possible at this time because of current issues with that system) you
> > run across those discussions about the voting being added to the TU/Aur
> > system. At that time we were SPECIFICALLY told that this would not be
> used
> > for restrictions in the future. Writing about that now is NOT being
> > dishonest. It is rather DIRECTLY related to what you propose.
> Things change Bob. Nothing in this world is set in stone, and most of us
> probably never made those promises. We can't be held to them.
> > As for not giving your proposal a chance. Your very correct about that. I
> > CHOOSE not to give it a chance. That is NOT however dishonest either. It
> is
> > not a bad thing to speak out about a proposal one does not like and sees
> > other way to accomplish the same result.
> You've proposed nothing that accomplishes the same result.

So you say.

Yes Lou I have proposed something that *will* accomplish the same result.
And without changing anything. And I have mentioned it three times. And you
keep denying it.

donated funds to improve things, then we should FIRST be looking at ways to
improve that donation system, because there has NOT been either a targeted
or focused fundraising effort to date.

I even told Aaron that I would donate a sum he would be thrilled to have, he
ONLY had to ask me for it here. He has not asked me. Others have asked me if
I was serious about this on the TU irc channel, so the fact that you missed
this is telling.

I am sure others, IF ASKED, would do the same as me and donate as needed.
And NO, a link onth e home page is NOT the same thing. i.e. If you guys put
the same vigor and effort into promoting a fundraising effort, you would
have the resources to host all manner of binary packages MUCH AS OTHER

> > I know it seems like a circular argument, but that is because your
> proposal
> > BEGS for a reason, and simply putting faith into a faithless entity like
> an
> > exceptional poor tool like the aurvotes is the heart of the matter with
> your
> > proposal. Even people supporting your proposal are quick to point out
> that
> > the aurvotes stinks as any form of metric.
> >
> > You should FIRST come up with a useful tool and then a need to make the
> repo
> > more "efficient", THEN and ONLY THEN shoudl you be asking us to consider
> > such a proposal.
> I have no problem with using votes as a metric.
> Three stats have been proposed: votes, pkgstats, and downloads.
> We are using two of those three. Downloads aren't quite feasible because
> they raise privacy concerns and there are technical problems in counting
> them. They'd probably show similar results anyways.

There is no evidence of what you claim. None presented to us for
consideration to date.

> When I see a problem I do what's in my power to correct it.
> If you have a problem with any of the stats that we are using, then you
> should suggest something else. Then again, your issue isn't really with
> the metric, it's with the proposal itself. That's why you haven't
> offered anything in cooperation to this discussion.
> Considering your opinion of votes I wonder why you were so concerned
> about votes here:

Not at all the same thing. And you know it.

> >From http://archlinux.org/pipermail/aur-general/2008-February/000741.html
> > P.S.... Will it be possible to retain or reinstate the 250-odd votes
> > this
> > package received ?; as it is now NOT extent in either unsupported OR the
> > community repo, and it would be nice to be able to properly reflect the
> > voting.
Lou, you are NOT anything more than coming off as cute with what you are
doing above. How about at least being honest about people NOT wanting your
proposal to be a first or even a second consideration for problems. Can you
simply acknowledge that ?

I am NOT alone in my crtique.


Bob Finch
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://archlinux.org/pipermail/aur-general/attachments/20081204/e9bf7781/attachment.htm>

More information about the aur-general mailing list