Re: Pear Comitee

El mar, 08-01-2002 a las 05:17, Graeme Merrall escribió: > Quoting "Tomas V.V.Cox" <cox@idecnet.com>: > > > For example a common PEAR developer who votes "Accept this class" and > > does a "Deep review" of it, will be given 8U == 8 votes. > > Now you're not going to make us all think hard are you? :) > If the process is too cumbersome then it may as well not exist or people will > not submit to the archive because of the complexity. > It reads like it'll all be tucked away behind 'karma' and business logic > though so that sounds mighty It couldn't be more easy. Just open a browser and do one click over your desicion radio button and other over the "type of review" you did (without any control, just be serious). That's all. All this mess logic I'm introducing (only to try to be equitative) will be treated inside the code. > > 7) Any memeber has no obligation to vote, but he will loose his PC > > account if doen't vote for more than three submissions. > > Consecutive I feel would be better although we should obviously account for > people to 'opt-out' temporarily due to other commitments/family etc. For > example, if I'd been evacuated in the bush fires here in Sydney and my PC went > up in flames then I should be kicked. A simple note or update of my record > should suffice. It's true, but as I said at the top, the goal of this system isn't to introduce too strict burocracy, it's only a way for helping potential contributors and improve the feedback we can give them in a easy and fast way. All the results will be open to anyone including comments, It's your matter to fill a negative vote to a class that may clash with your personal situation. Tomas V.V.Cox