[aur-general] discussion about activity
danielmicay at gmail.com
Wed Aug 7 12:26:41 EDT 2013
On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 12:13 PM, Lukas Fleischer
<archlinux at cryptocrack.de> wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 07, 2013 at 02:10:45PM +0000, Xyne wrote:
>> I want to discuss our notions of "activity". According to the current bylaws,
> This discussion starts to get messy. Now there are three different
> threads discussing the same thing, basically. Could we please
> concentrate on the current proposal and the related discussion before
> initiating a new one?
> Also, you still didn't comment on the suggestion to remove the activity
> part from the quorum computation altogether. Please read Sébastien's
> reply (and follow-ups) to my proposal. The quorum is meant to ensure
> that a result is representative. If 60% of all TUs are inactive, we can
> currently establish a quorum of 100%. This does not seem right to me.
> Also, dropping the activity restriction makes things a lot easier, so
> this gets a +2 from me...
A simple majority of 51% isn't a consensus among the team, regardless
of how many people voted. I don't think proposals should pass at all
when nearly half of us object.
Rather than the quorum, we could require a super-majority (60%, 70%)
of the trusted users to vote YES and handle inactivity removals
If 8 people are on vacation, it's not a good time to be passing proposals.
More information about the aur-general