On Sun 05 Dec 2010 11:53 -0500, Kaiting Chen wrote: > On Sun, Dec 5, 2010 at 11:33 AM, Shacristo <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Sun, Dec 5, 2010 at 11:16 AM, Kaiting Chen <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > One of the stated purposes of the quorum is to "ensure that TUs remain > > active in the job that they have taken on." Allowing circumvention of > > the quorum requirements will obviously undermine that. > > TU's have a lot of different responsibilities. Prolonging a decided vote by > six days to motivate or ensure that someone is active does not make sense to > me. --Kaiting.
I would propose shortening the voting period then. I kind of like how the system is set up (not perfectly though) to remove the inactive TUs semi-automatically.
