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

Peter Lewis plewis at aur.archlinux.org
Tue Dec 7 15:27:00 EST 2010

On Tuesday 07 December 2010 19:02:59 Xyne wrote:
> Peter Lewis wrote:
> > This means that we cannot override (A) in the rest of the byelaws. I can
> > imagine that we might want to create something requiring (say) a 2/3rds
> > majority for some type of serious proposal at some point... How about:
> /snip
> > Just more thoughts, trying to spot loopholes, etc... :-)
> The formatting got mangled. The format was
> The proposal is foo if EITHER
>   A) condition 1 OR
>   B) condition 2
> UNLESS some other condition
> The indentation should make it clear that the EITHER and UNLESS wrap
> the two choices. If you have a better idea of how to "insert parentheses"
> then let me know.

Ah, thought so :-)

> Here's version 3 again without wrapping, hopefully:


Yeah, I don't have any better suggestion really, and apart from my general 
dislike for using whitespace to provide meaning (a la python) it's pretty 
clear to me.

Actually... how about switching the sentence around somewhat:

> UNLESS some other condition, the proposal is foo if EITHER
>   A) condition 1 OR
>   B) condition 2

is that clearer?

So my only other suggestion would be that in my other post, about proposals 
having to have yes/no answers.

Also - and this is a wider point - who should be allowed to make proposals? 
Only TUs, I presume... (maybe technical details just make this a moot point 


More information about the aur-general mailing list