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

Kaiting Chen kaitocracy at gmail.com
Wed Dec 8 11:59:31 EST 2010

On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 11:01 AM, Xyne <xyne at archlinux.ca> wrote:

> Let's wait another day to get some more comments and incorporate any last
> changes. If it changes during the discussion period without unanimous
> consent
> then we would end up in a grey area when deciding which version to vote on
> (and
> we're limited by YES/NO proposals... haha).

I'm nitpicking here because we're pretty much at the final edit: Why do we
have this redundant construct? "aur-general mailing list (aur-general)".
Also I fixed one case of bylaws -> by-laws. And personally I prefer
'exceeds' to 'is greater than', and 'exceeds or equals' to 'is greater than
or equal to' just for conciseness.

Also I find the parts regarding the length of the discussion and voting
period reading "UNLESS otherwise stated in a section of the by-laws
pertaining to the proposal" rather awkward. I looked at the original bylaws
and under the Standard Voting Procedure section says only "a certain period
of time should be allotted to its discussion" without prescribing any length
of time (it leaves the actual length of time to the sections describing each
action). I would rather that this part read as the original by-laws, or that
we standardize the length of the discussion period (make everything have a X
day discussion period).

Also if we are putting stuff like five day discussion section, seven day
voting period, 66% quorum in the Standard Voting Procedure section, are we
going to remove the redundant information in the other sections? As it
stands now every section says 66% quorum. --Kaiting.

Kiwis and Limes: http://kaitocracy.blogspot.com/

More information about the aur-general mailing list