[aur-general] TU applications, discussion periods and "no" votes.

[Morten Linderud]

On Tue, Dec 15, 2020 at 06:07:06AM +0100, Xyne wrote:
> Hi all,

Yo!

> In at least one recent TU application, there was not a single criticism or
> negative remark during the discussion period and yet there was still a "no"
> vote in the result. A "no" vote is an objection and it is important to bring it
> up during the discussion period so that other TUs may take it into
> consideration when voting. It also gives the candidate the opportunity to
> address it, which itself can be very informative during the discussion period.
> 
> I am not trying to call anyone out. It may well be the case that someone missed
> the discussion period or misclicked while voting, or has a personal objection
> or a blood vendetta against the candidate's family spanning back 5 generations
> that they are not allowed to talk about. I absolutely do not want to know who
> voted "no" or why. I just want to encourage everyone to participate in the
> discussion period when they have something to add.

There was some confusion regarding the difference between not voting, "No" and
"Abstain" on IRC a month or two back. This was cleared up in this particular
scenario, but it might be the case that someone doesn't feel like they can make
an informed decision and instead of "Abstain" click the "No" button.

> Regards,
> Xyne

Cheers!

-- 
Morten Linderud
PGP: 9C02FF419FECBE16
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.archlinux.org/pipermail/aur-general/attachments/20201215/2161c076/attachment.sig>