[aur-general] Trusted Users, Secret ballots, Openness?

[Angel Velásquez]

On Thu, Dec 17, 2009 at 5:33 PM, Loui Chang <louipc.ist at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu 17 Dec 2009 20:31 +0100, Xyne wrote:
>> > TU votes were never meant to be secret, it only came about as the
>> > implementation of the voting application. We don't live under a violent
>> > military coup or anything. You should be able to identify with your
>> > thoughts in a free society. The discussion period is there for people to
>> > voice any concerns, if that creates tension - so be it. I hope we aren't
>> > all wimps that can't take a little bit of conflict. I'd like to know
>> > that our Trusted Users are able to voice their opinions and uphold the
>> > Arch Way, etc.
>>
>> That's a nice strawman argument which completely disregards social
>> psychology and the real reason for secret ballots, even if a TU vote
>> means absolutely nothing in the grand scheme of the universe. You're
>> also confusing the discussion period with post-electoral discussion,
>> which are two very different things. Invoking others to "uphold the Arch
>> Way" in this context is completely without meaning and seems to be
>> nothing more than a baseless emotional appeal that goes hand-in-hand
>> with the previous strawman argument. I'm actually surprised to see such
>> a crude statement.
>
> I don't know what straw man you're referring to, but when it comes to TUs
> we are no longer regular users who should be hiding behind secret
> ballots. By merit and by votes we are representatives of the Trusted
> Users and of the community.
>
> I was only referring to the discussion period. By all accounts there
> were no problems, so the proposal should have passed. If there were any
> outstanding issues they should have been raised. The people that voted
> 'NO' should not have been silent. The fact that there was no debate
> implies that people were afraid to voice their opinions, or were weary
> of the conversation.
>
> In all honesty though, it's difficult for me to trust someone who cloaks
> their identity and hides their opinions. Perhaps you were offended
> because you cloak your identity. I didn't really consider that, I
> apologize. I mean no personal attack. This is just the way I feel.
>
>> If you really feel that way, change the TU interface to make the voting
>> public and display each TU's vote next to his or her name.
>
> I might look into that, at least for disclosing details for the Trusted
> Users.
>
>> I'll end this here before I suppress the wimp in me and flesh out my
>> reply to Loui's post.
>
> I would definitely be interested in an explanation of the social
> psychology.
>
>


Well, I am Inactive at this moment sorry if I didn't answer first, by
the way I am on the office so I shouldn't be writting long emails and
"wasting time" (since my boss conception).

I proposed a patch to see who voted, and I remember people who dislike
the idea (BaSh, and others TUs) then, a method to know if a TU it was
Inactive at the point that he wasn't voting or something, I created
that patch (Loui pimped and then he applied it).

Now its obviously that I was one who voted 'no' and it was by several reasons:

1) The guy is annoying, and I don't like his attitude (one thing is a
person who wanna contribute, the way that he do is like .. he just
want to appears in any credits, note: this it's my perception of his
attitude).

2) He tried in a very-short time to re-apply (I know he applied after
three months), but he didn't passed the Discussion period the last
time, he really should be sure to convince the people who voted no,
instead to be desperated to appear in any credits.

3) AUR2? Where is the implementation? I can't confirm if he did
something on AUR2 and since my point of view the actually main
developers of AUR (Loui, Wizzo, Bash, etc)  are not involved in that
development, I know some people were working on AUR2, but seriously
there is not a release date, even nobody have thought when will be
official this release of AUR, so basicly, he maybe is contributing in
something that won't be used in a future, so thgis can't count as a
"contribution" and as I said, for anything (comment, code, etc) that
he have done, said, wrote .. he seems to be waiting for a medal or
diploma or w/e .. again, is his attitude.

4) We are full of TU's at this moment (25 according to the Wiki page),
honestly this is the less important reason, because we have many
people away (like me) or doing little contributions (like me again and
the new TUs who are step by step incorporating to the team), IMO we
don't need to have a long list of 300+ TUs doing .. nothing?

So basicly these are my reasons, sorry Laszlo, but you didn't convinced me.

P.S: I don't know if I loss my vote because that bug about lang and
votations, I hope not, else this mail will be very non-sense.

-- 
Angel Velásquez
angvp @ irc.freenode.net
Arch Linux Trusted User
Linux Counter: #359909
http://www.angvp.com