On Sat, Mar 23, 2013 at 6:51 PM, Xyne <[email protected]> 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. 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, -- Sébastien "Seblu" Luttringer https://www.seblu.net GPG: 0x2072D77A
