[aur-general] TU application from graysky - voting period

Don deJuan donjuansjiz at gmail.com
Sun Mar 24 01:23:39 EDT 2013

On 03/23/2013 09:59 PM, Sébastien Luttringer wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 23, 2013 at 6:51 PM, Xyne <xyne at archlinux.ca> wrote:
>> Xyne wrote:
>> @TUs
>> The discussion period for this application was relatively short with very few
>> participating TUs. The only real objections were raised by Dave (who even
>> admitted that he may be "old and grumpy") and they were addressed without any
>> further replies from Dave or anyone else. I simply do not understand how so
>> many of you could vote no without raising issues during the discussion. Looking
>> back through previous votes there is no other vote with this level of
>> participation that has been split this close down the middle.
> I was denied the first time I applied. I never heard strong arguments
> about why from any TU.
> The reason I found, is like here, an active TU express a tough opinion
> (from a misunderstanding on awesome in my case).
> I guess the team wants to be united and will not elect someone which
> was strongly denied by one of us.
Is that not putting popularity before the distro? Following one blindly
is never good regardless of the person.
> Now I see this as positive and only require to be solved before next
> application.
>> There is no point in raising your objections now but I hope that you do so next
>> time.
> There were objections! You consider them not sufficient to leads to this result.
> Everything that needed to be said has been said. After the voters have
> made up their minds.
> @graysky: Please keep going and convince every TU that you have to be
> aboard and reapply.
> Cheers,
I think Xyne shows what being open and honest publicly should be like,
especially in this voting process. Should other's not state why they
agree to this one statement?

>From a non TU's perspective D.R. was the only one who could publicly
state why greysky should not be a TU, and the rest of the sheeple just
followed the "old and grumpy" man, at least that is "public" appearance
of this whole thing. As been stated already there have been some TU's I
have seen fly through that do not even appear as active as greysky is as
a non TU. To me and maybe I just love a good story, but there seems more
behind the denial than was publicly discussed.

@greysky from one non TU to another keep up the good work, some of your
posts have helped me when researching problems I had.

More information about the aur-general mailing list