[aur-general] [PATCH] tu-bylaws: Amend Standard Voting Procedure

Loui Chang louipc.ist at gmail.com
Mon Dec 6 23:37:53 EST 2010

On Mon 06 Dec 2010 23:08 -0500, Kaiting Chen wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 11:31 AM, Thorsten Töpper
> <atsutane at freethoughts.de>wrote:
> > So far it is mostly fine for me, however from this paragraph it is not
> > clear if the vote is still open when the quorum was reached and the
> > application passed. In my opinion it should be, so everyone has the
> > chance to do a vote and express his way though it doesn't matter.
> > (Yes it does not make any formal sense, however I think about human
> > emotions that it's better to do so, so no one feels to be excluded
> > just as the vote is another in a row where he/she could not
> > participate. In other words: Kaiting that was what I meant yesterday.)
> I'm not really one for human emotion, but I'll go ahead and conceded to a
> full voting period regardless of whether or not a vote is set.
> I've read through this a couple more times and I'm little concerned about
> the particular wording. Unfortunately I don't know how to make this any
> clearer so I guess I'll shut up...

Honestly, I wouldn't mind hearing your concerns.
I realise that I could improve my writing skills at least.

Do we have any technical writers in the community? :D

More information about the aur-general mailing list