You are not logged in.

#1 2013-05-16 22:02:52

karol
Archivist
Registered: 2009-05-06
Posts: 25,423

[solved] I have trouble understanding Trusted User Bylaws

I am not an English native speaker and I am not used to reading formal documents such as Trusted User Bylaws, so I might be misunderstanding something.

First issue:
https://aur.archlinux.org/trusted-user/ … _procedure says

The proposal is accepted if EITHER
1. the number of YES votes is greater than half the number of active TUs OR
2. quorum has been established and the number of YES votes is greater than the number of NO votes

UNLESS otherwise stated in a section of the bylaws pertaining to the proposal.

The proposal is rejected if EITHER
1. the number of NO votes is greater than or equal to half the number of active TUs OR
2. quorum was established and the number of NO votes is greater than or equal to the number of YES votes

UNLESS otherwise stated in a section of the bylaws pertaining to the proposal.

but later it says

If quorum is not established by the end of the voting period then the proposal is neither accepted nor rejected.

My understanding is that if e.g. the number of YES votes is greater than half the number of active TUs, we don't care if the quorum has been reached - the proposal has passed anyway.



Second issue:
https://aur.archlinux.org/trusted-user/ … _of_bylaws says

An active Trusted User must motion for an amendment by sending an announcement to aur-general.

Can a person who is not a TU suggest some improvements and find a TU who will file a motion?

Are minor issues like deciding on "quorum has been established" v. "quorum was established" or visual consistency i.e. do you add a space before the closing parenthesis

SVP( inactivity_removal_of_TU, 3, 0.66, 5 );

or not

SVP( general_removal_of_TU, 7, 0.75, 7);

considered a terrible waste of time to fix or is it OK to suggest such amendments?



Third issue:
What about https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Bylaw_Amendment ? Apart from obvious errors like

the number of NO votes is greater than or equal to the number of active TUs have voted NO OR

is the article correct or has it been superseded by https://aur.archlinux.org/trusted-user/ … _of_bylaws ?
If this wiki article is to stay, I think it should be edited to make sense and locked.

Last edited by karol (2013-05-20 22:27:36)

Offline

#2 2013-05-16 22:28:07

madr
Member
From: Norway
Registered: 2013-04-25
Posts: 87

Re: [solved] I have trouble understanding Trusted User Bylaws

karol wrote:

I am not an English native speaker and I am not used to reading formal documents such as Trusted User Bylaws, so I might be misunderstanding something.

First issue:
https://aur.archlinux.org/trusted-user/ … _procedure says

The proposal is accepted if EITHER
1. the number of YES votes is greater than half the number of active TUs OR
2. quorum has been established and the number of YES votes is greater than the number of NO votes

UNLESS otherwise stated in a section of the bylaws pertaining to the proposal.

The proposal is rejected if EITHER
1. the number of NO votes is greater than or equal to half the number of active TUs OR
2. quorum was established and the number of NO votes is greater than or equal to the number of YES votes

UNLESS otherwise stated in a section of the bylaws pertaining to the proposal.

but later it says

If quorum is not established by the end of the voting period then the proposal is neither accepted nor rejected.

My understanding is that if e.g. the number of YES votes is greater than half the number of active TUs, we don't care if the quorum has been reached - the proposal has passed anyway.

I am not that into the TU aspect yet, since I'm a fairly fresh user. But one should assume that any reasonable quorum is reached if, as you use in your example, over 50% of the TUs have participated.

EDIT: At least when that 50% is on the same side. It won't be possible for " the other side" to override it anyway, since it's over 50%.

Last edited by madr (2013-05-16 22:33:21)

Offline

#3 2013-05-16 22:53:25

karol
Archivist
Registered: 2009-05-06
Posts: 25,423

Re: [solved] I have trouble understanding Trusted User Bylaws

https://aur.archlinux.org/trusted-user/ … on_of_a_tu says the quorum for this procedure is 66% of active TUs.
What happens if there are 21 active TUs and 11 have voted YES, 1 has voted NO, 1 has voted ABSTAIN? The quorum hasn't been reached as only 13 TUs have voted.

Offline

#4 2013-05-16 22:57:00

Allan
Developer
From: Brisbane, AU
Registered: 2007-06-09
Posts: 10,368
Website

Re: [solved] I have trouble understanding Trusted User Bylaws

What happens...   there is moaning on the boards about lack of people voting and the proposal gets accepted.   Well, at least that is what happened when I just made decisions rather then consulting the bylaws.

Offline

#5 2013-05-16 22:58:37

madr
Member
From: Norway
Registered: 2013-04-25
Posts: 87

Re: [solved] I have trouble understanding Trusted User Bylaws

karol wrote:

https://aur.archlinux.org/trusted-user/ … on_of_a_tu says the quorum for this procedure is 66% of active TUs.
What happens if there are 21 active TUs and 11 have voted YES, 1 has voted NO, 1 has voted ABSTAIN? The quorum hasn't been reached as only 13 TUs have voted.


Yes, but as I mentioned in my last post the result could never be altered by taking the vote of the last 8 TUs. So I think it's only reasonable that a situation like that is either viewed as quorum, or something that overrides it.

Last edited by madr (2013-05-16 22:59:21)

Offline

#6 2013-05-16 23:18:38

karol
Archivist
Registered: 2009-05-06
Posts: 25,423

Re: [solved] I have trouble understanding Trusted User Bylaws

@Allan and @madr
Fine, but "If quorum is not established by the end of the voting period then the proposal is neither accepted nor rejected." means the vote should be repeated.
If we get rid of this sentence then the proposal gets accepted because "the number of YES votes is greater than half the number of active TUs".

If I understand this issue correctly and the Bylaws are taken seriously then a TU should motion to amend them and e.g. remove the offending sentence that makes the Bylaws contradict themselves or rephrase them so they fit  madr's ideas about the quorum.

Or maybe nobody cares about the technicalities.

Offline

#7 2013-05-16 23:23:40

ngoonee
Forum Fellow
From: Between Thailand and Singapore
Registered: 2009-03-17
Posts: 6,791

Re: [solved] I have trouble understanding Trusted User Bylaws

karol wrote:

Or maybe nobody cares about the technicalities.

This.

If you look at the bylaws as they stand its possible for two colluding TUs to effectively remove all other TUs.


Allan-Volunteer on the (topic being discussed) mailn lists. You never get the people who matters attention on the forums.
jasonwryan-Installing Arch is a measure of your literacy. Maintaining Arch is a measure of your diligence. Contributing to Arch is a measure of your competence.
Griemak-Bleeding edge, not bleeding flat. Edge denotes falls will occur from time to time. Bring your own parachute.

Offline

#8 2013-05-16 23:27:38

madr
Member
From: Norway
Registered: 2013-04-25
Posts: 87

Re: [solved] I have trouble understanding Trusted User Bylaws

If the original idea of these regulations matches my suggestion (I can't possibly know this), I think that something should be added to the last sentence, rather than removing it. To the effect of: "If quorum is not established, or so on and so on, by the end of the voting period then the proposal is neither accepted nor rejected".

Offline

#9 2013-05-16 23:35:25

karol
Archivist
Registered: 2009-05-06
Posts: 25,423

Re: [solved] I have trouble understanding Trusted User Bylaws

ngoonee wrote:
karol wrote:

Or maybe nobody cares about the technicalities.

This.

Ah, OK then.

ngoonee wrote:

If you look at the bylaws as they stand its possible for two colluding TUs to effectively remove all other TUs.

How? They need a quorum of 75%.

Offline

#10 2013-05-17 00:04:39

Trilby
Forum Moderator
From: Massachusetts, USA
Registered: 2011-11-29
Posts: 13,526
Website

Re: [solved] I have trouble understanding Trusted User Bylaws

ngoonee wrote:

... its possible for two colluding TUs to effectively remove all other TUs.

These two?

(edit: that videos title seems to be off by 220%)

Last edited by Trilby (2013-05-17 00:05:55)


InterrobangSlider
• How's my coding? See this page.
• How's my moderating? Feel free to email any concerns, complaints, or objections.

Offline

#11 2013-05-17 00:55:07

oldpond
Member
Registered: 2010-01-26
Posts: 41

Re: [solved] I have trouble understanding Trusted User Bylaws

Allan wrote:

What happens...   there is moaning on the boards about lack of people voting and the proposal gets accepted.   Well, at least that is what happened when I just made decisions rather then consulting the bylaws.

Aw...say it ain't so!  smile  Makes sense though.  I kinda thought this was a meritocracy, not a democracy.  Voices get heard, decisions get made.


oldpond = glide

Offline

#12 2013-05-17 01:03:36

Allan
Developer
From: Brisbane, AU
Registered: 2007-06-09
Posts: 10,368
Website

Re: [solved] I have trouble understanding Trusted User Bylaws

karol wrote:
ngoonee wrote:
karol wrote:

Or maybe nobody cares about the technicalities.

This.

Ah, OK then.

ngoonee wrote:

If you look at the bylaws as they stand its possible for two colluding TUs to effectively remove all other TUs.

How? They need a quorum of 75%.

75% of active tus. Those up for removal are not able to vote.

Offline

#13 2013-05-17 01:12:22

karol
Archivist
Registered: 2009-05-06
Posts: 25,423

Re: [solved] I have trouble understanding Trusted User Bylaws

Assuming you are allowed to remove many TUs at once and have a very loose definition of "valid reason that the TU in question should be removed".

Offline

#14 2013-05-17 01:52:36

Allan
Developer
From: Brisbane, AU
Registered: 2007-06-09
Posts: 10,368
Website

Re: [solved] I have trouble understanding Trusted User Bylaws

Yes. That is why the bylaws should not be taken too seriously imo.  The devs work on a "lack of serious objection" principle, but we do not have to vote in reasonably unknown people to the team.

Offline

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB