[aur-general] TU Bylaws Amendment (SVP Section): Discussion Period
xyne at archlinux.ca
Wed Dec 15 19:32:23 EST 2010
Ronald van Haren wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 12, 2010 at 9:01 AM, Ray Rashif <schiv at archlinux.org> wrote:
> > On 12 December 2010 11:39, Loui Chang <louipc.ist at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> On Sun 12 Dec 2010 04:21 +0100, Xyne wrote:
> >>> The following is a proposed replacement for the current SVP section of the TU
> >>> bylaws:
> >>> https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php?title=Bylaw_Amendment&oldid=124557
> >>> The changes address several issues recently brought up on this list. Briefly,
> >>> these include:
> >>> * enabling a vote to pass in the absence of quorum when more than 50% of active
> >>> TUs have voted YES
> >>> * enabling a vote to fail in the absence of quorum when 50% or more of active
> >>> TUs have voted NO
> >>> * clarifying the text to eliminate ambiguities
> >>> Please see Kaiting's "[aur-general]Amendment" thread and Loui's
> >>> "[aur-general][PATCH]tu-bylaws: Amend Standard Voting Procedure" thread for
> >>> more details.
> >>> This message marks the beginning of the 5-day discussion period before the
> >>> amendment is put to a vote.
> >> Can we get that as a patch so I may apply it to the hosted version if
> >> the vote passes? The content should probably be on the mailing list as
> >> well.
> > We can compare-and-contrast better looking at a patch, so +1 to that.
> yes, please provide a patch.
In the time that it would take me to find sources and create a patch you could
have easily provided one from the submitted text. If someone wants to point me
to the relative source and describe the preferred format of the patch then I
will waste some of my time to create it, but I will tell you now that I think
the request itself is a bit ridiculous. It's plain text.
More information about the aur-general