[aur-general] trusted users business

[Loui Chang]

On Fri 16 Jul 2010 10:14 -0300, Angel Velásquez wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 8:36 PM, Loui Chang <louipc.ist at gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Thu 15 Jul 2010 14:11 -0300, Angel Velásquez wrote:
> >> 2010/7/15 Angel Velásquez <angvp at archlinux.com.ve>:
> >> >
> >> > So let's start the removal procedure for swiergot (who is pretty
> >> > dissapeared).
> >> >
> >>
> >> Removal procedure is started, swiergot downgraded as a Normal User for
> >> keep sure that he won't vote (Removal procedure states that a TU can't
> >> vote against him).
> >
> > You are wrong to start this removal process. None of those Trusted Users
> > have prevented quorum from being met yet. Please reverse your actions.
> >
> > If you do want to remove them, you should offer some other reason and we
> > need to vote on it, or we could vote on a change to the bylaws to
> > redefine inactivity.
> 
> Bah, I should vote for a change the bylaws, I missunderstood what I
> quoted before (Isaac's did a good point).
> 
> Facts are (speaking generally):
> 
> a) Removal of a TU is very hard, (even if he/she or they aren't doing
> anything), we should need some 'automatic way' or .. less bereucratic
> way to do that.

Removing a TU is not any harder than adding a TU, do you propose that we
can remove TUs willy-nilly without votes? I don't agree with that idea.

> b) TU System on AUR need so much code ... (it's very limited) and I
> can't or edit/delete that votation progress. It's invalid, of course,
> but at the system level isn't.

That's fine. It's just a method to collect votes - nothing more really.
We used to do it via the mailing list.

> c) I've speaked on the IRC channel, which btw loui we always would
> like to have you there (don't know why you don't like to enter or
> randomly :P), so I missunderstood somepart of the bylaws as Isaac
> pointed me, but nobody told me anything too.. so I am accepting my
> fault, but maybe if you were on our irc channel, you can advice me
> before to send the application etc etc.

Yeah you should better familiarise yourself with the bylaws and ask for
clarification if there's any misunderstanding.

> We're waiting yet for a swiergot's response yet.. so if past 24 hours
> of the last mail, he doesn't replied anything I will ask for his
> removal (on the TU channel though, and oh, again, you Loui are invited
> to join us!, we are so wonderful people there :D)

Decision bearing discussion needs to be done over the mailing list, not
IRC. We have TUs from all over the globe. IRC is not practical. People
have to work or sleep at different times and may not be able to attend
an IRC meeting.

Cheers