On 10 Jun 2013, at 1:24 AM, Tim Williams <william...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 9, 2013 at 6:50 PM, Alan Cabrera <l...@toolazydogs.com> wrote: >> I'm confused. I thought that only a 72 hour lazy consensus was needed to >> start a new lab. > > You're kinda right, lazy consensus, but our bylaws define lazy > consensus as "at least three +1 and no -1, 72 hours"[0]. There were > only 2 binding +1's in this case... Given our nature, I was supposing > we could just relax the 72 hour bit in this case. That clear up your > confusion? Personally, I'd be supportive of moving to lazy approval > at some point, but that doesn't change the current quandary I should have voted for my own lab, but got sidetracked. Here is my (late) vote: +1. Regards, Graham --
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
