[aur-general] amendment bylaws: voting & tur-user

[Callan Barrett]

On Thu, May 8, 2008 at 7:58 PM, Ronald van Haren <pressh at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 5/8/08, Callan Barrett <wizzomafizzo at gmail.com> wrote:
>  > On Wed, May 7, 2008 at 9:09 PM, Allan McRae <mcrae_allan at hotmail.com> wrote:
>  >  > Ronald van Haren wrote:
>  >  >
>  >  > > Hi TUs,
>  >  > >
>  >  > > As Xavier pointed out
>  >  > > (http://archlinux.org/pipermail/aur-general/2008-May/007651.html) , we
>  >  > > still haven't decided if we want to use the new voting system. So it
>  >  > > is time to do decide.
>  >  > >
>  >  > > According to the bylaws we need to discuss & vote before we can change
>  >  > > things in the bylaws.
>  >  > >
>  >  > > I propose two changes:
>  >  > >
>  >  > > 1. change all appearances of tur-users to aur-general
>  >  > >
>  >  > > 2.  the fourth section of the standard voting procedure to (at least
>  >  > similar to)
>  >  > > #######################################
>  >  > > Following the discussion period, a voting period opens. Simple YES, NO
>  >  > > , or ABSTAIN votes are to be cast under the Trusted User section of
>  >  > > the AUR homepage by at least a quorum of active TUs.
>  >  > > ######################################
>  >  > >
>  >  > > The SVP for changing the bylaws is:
>  >  > > SVP( amend_bylaws, 5, 0.75, 7);
>  >  > >
>  >  > > This mail starts the 5 day discussion period. Please note that in the
>  >  > > discussion period you have to vote for both points ;)
>  >  > >
>  >  > > Ronald
>  >  > >
>  >  > >
>  >  > >
>  >  > >
>  >  >  I am all for the first point.
>  >  >
>  >  >  For the second, going through the responses from the thread announcing the
>  >  > AUR voting system there were concerns about not being able to abstain
>  >  > (although I think you can according to the vote summary) and email
>  >  > notifications.  For email notifications, it is easy enough to mail the list
>  >  > (as ammended in point one) when a vote is added.  An automatic system could
>  >  > be worked out later.
>  >  >
>  >  >  As a query, can we see who has voted for a proposal.  We might start
>  >  > running into quorum issues if we can't track who has voted and give those
>  >  > who don't a boot (a bit pessimistic I know, but probably justified...)
>  >  >
>  >  >  Allan
>  >
>  >
>  > I'll clear some stuff up I guess, I haven't really been bothered with
>  >  doing anything about this since I quit being a TU. Email notifications
>  >  aren't in there but it's not hard to add, tell me exactly where you
>  >  need notification and I can patch it in but for now people can just as
>  >  easily email that a vote has started or ended or whatever for now
>  >  (there's no easy way to help those last two cases anyway). On votes,
>  >  that you've voted is recorded but your actual vote is not so it's..
>  >  semi-anonymous. The fact that the votes are anonymous was a big reason
>  >  I wrote this in the first place, in my opinion public votes are as
>  >  good as just skipping votes and assuming everyone said yes. I also
>  >  have a script somewhere that lists whether someone has voted or not in
>  >  the last few votes but it's not actually in the AUR at the moment,
>  >  worst case scenario that can be used.
>  >
>  >  --
>  >
>  > Callan Barrett
>  >
>  >
>  Maybe, apart from an announcement main send when a new vote has been
>  created, maybe some sort of summary can be send after the voting
>  period has ended with the results and the people that failed to vote?
>  (just thinking out loud..)
>
>

I'm just not sure how to do it since there's no action closing a vote,
it's just based on the date. I was thinking riding the back of the
daemon already running in the AUR repo but if anyone else has better
ideas tell me since I'd rather not.

-- 
Callan Barrett