On 18/01/2013, at 9:10 AM, Adam Heath wrote:

> On 01/17/2013 01:18 PM, Jacopo Cappellato wrote:
>> On Jan 17, 2013, at 8:11 PM, Ean Schuessler wrote:
>> 
>>> think Adam's point was that someone could synthesize a vote from you (or, 
>>> more importantly a vote from a mostly dormant member like Adam) and get 
>>> something to pass. Since, in practice, this kind of thing doesn't ever seem 
>>> to happen its probably not worth worrying about but his point is still 
>>> cogent. 
>> 
>> Ok, thanks for the explanation Ean.
> 
> Not just that, but there was no weekend timeframe available for this
> voting period.  Other people who are more active may only work on
> ofbiz during the weekend, so you need to allow them time to become
> aware of such a vote.

You could always just consider using some mail rules to prioritize voting 
threads so you see them a bit earlier.  Personally I just spend the 5 
seconds/day it takes to quickly scan the recent subject lines for anything of 
interest.

I think the risk of fake votes is very low, the only votes of relevance are 
those required to cross the threshold of +3 or whatever it takes for a vote to 
be rejected.  There's always 3 PMC members around to give the green light and 
any negative votes would involve a fair amount of follow up discussion should 
they cause the motion to fail to pass.  Lets save any additional bureaucracy 
for when there's an actual need.

Regards
Scott

Reply via email to