[06:13:50] *** Quits: Guest1487 (~wolfcore@68-186-62-132.dhcp.mdfd.or.charter.com) (Changing host)
[06:13:50] *** Joins: Guest1487 (~wolfcore@unaffiliated/wolfcore)
[06:13:59] *** Guest1487 is now known as wolfcore
[13:30:06] <iangcarroll> decision day gsingh93
[13:30:15] <iangcarroll> lower nominations to two?
[13:47:18] <sivoais> the # of nominations might be discussed at <https://github.com/wearehx/policies/pull/10>
[13:47:19] <yossarian-bot> Title: Admin policy by gsingh93 · Pull Request #10 · wearehx/policies · GitHub
[14:58:28] <gsingh93> i think we should lower the number of required nominations to two and raise the number of nominations you have to three
[14:58:30] <gsingh93> we've already talked about the second one
[14:58:32] <gsingh93> for the first one, i think you should only need one other person to want you to run to be able to run
[14:58:34] <gsingh93> so they nominate you, and then you nominate yourself
[14:58:36] <gsingh93> or two people nominate you
[16:11:35] *** Quits: wolfcore (~wolfcore@unaffiliated/wolfcore) (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
[16:18:18] *** Joins: wolfcore (~wolfcore@68-186-62-132.dhcp.mdfd.or.charter.com)
[16:18:41] *** wolfcore is now known as Guest30380
[16:19:00] <iangcarroll> yeah
[16:19:06] <iangcarroll> post to the PR and see what people think?
[16:19:21] <iangcarroll> how many are eligible to run btw?
[16:22:04] <iangcarroll> i think a FB post might be better actually
[16:34:17] <gsingh93> yea, i'll make a post when i get home tonight
[16:34:24] <gsingh93> i'll check the stats in a bit
[16:35:27] <iangcarroll> kk
[16:35:30] <iangcarroll> want me to make the post now?
[16:38:08] <gsingh93> actually, let me just check the stats right now
[16:38:12] <gsingh93> and then i'll let you know
[16:41:26] <iangcarroll> kk
[16:46:26] <gsingh93> iangcarroll: can you send me that paste again that let you see the number of nominations for each user
[16:46:38] <iangcarroll> >not using a bouncer
[16:46:56] <iangcarroll> http://pastie.org/private/ikpyo4e58enph5pklr0xq
[16:46:56] <yossarian-bot> Title: Private Paste - Pastie
[16:47:04] <iangcarroll> though you have to modify it to use by reference
[16:47:48] <gsingh93> yup
[16:47:51] <gsingh93> ian i am using a bouncer
[16:48:17] <gsingh93> it's complicated though, i actively use many computers, lol
[16:48:25] <iangcarroll> ah
[16:51:18] <gsingh93> 5 users have 2 or more votes (one is probably me)
[16:51:51] <gsingh93> about 25 users have 1 or more votes
[16:52:40] <gsingh93> so, can you increase the nominations to match NUM_ADMINS if you haven't already, and then decreased the required nominations to 2?
[16:53:08] <iangcarroll> yea
[16:55:27] <iangcarroll> do we want to get input on the second part?
[16:55:35] <iangcarroll> from others?
[16:55:46] <gsingh93> i don't think so (at least not for this election)
[16:55:55] <gsingh93> we can make a comment on the admin policy for next time
[16:56:04] <gsingh93> but we don't have much time to discuss with more people
[16:58:22] <iangcarroll> kk
[17:13:54] <gsingh93> do you think we should make another post (not a comment)?
[17:14:16] <iangcarroll> encouraging nominating/running? yes
[17:15:06] <iangcarroll> should we have a UUID be generated for every vote and not for every user?
[17:15:26] <gsingh93> i'm not sure...
[17:15:33] <gsingh93> what are the pros and cons?
[17:15:53] <gsingh93> also, another issue is people who have enough votes to run might not realize it
[17:15:57] <gsingh93> they might not check back
[17:16:01] <gsingh93> can we generate notifications?
[17:16:43] <iangcarroll> cons are some development time, more complex interface, and no data analysis; pros are you can reveal one of your UUIDs and be able to vote anonymously after that
[17:18:38] <iangcarroll> that's a todo item, email notifications
[17:20:24] <iangcarroll> would it make fraud easier for the maintainer/others if we did that? there'd be no way to see spikes of users only voting in one election or patterns in voting behavior
[17:21:05] <gsingh93> hmm, yea
[17:21:22] <gsingh93> anyway to solve that pro in a different way?
[17:21:46] <gsingh93> the maintainer could regenerate a UUID on a case by case basis
[17:22:05] <iangcarroll> makes election results mutable though
[17:22:06] <gsingh93> there are some issues with that though, as you'd be able to narrow down which UUIDs didn't vote in the upcoming election
[17:22:12] <gsingh93> how?
[17:22:23] <iangcarroll> well, the UUIDs would change in the results
[17:22:26] <iangcarroll> not the votes themselves
[17:22:35] <gsingh93> yea
[18:01:39] <gsingh93> i see you've hardcoded two in the application for the number of required nominations
[18:01:49] <gsingh93> lol
[18:01:54] <iangcarroll> lol yes
[18:02:16] <iangcarroll> luckily it doesn't change very often
[18:02:17] <gsingh93> i was just checking you changed it in both spots
[18:02:19] <gsingh93> yea
[18:02:25] <iangcarroll> though I should put it in an env variable
[18:02:27] <gsingh93> well
[18:02:33] <gsingh93> you could at least make it an application constant
[18:02:50] <iangcarroll> yeah, might make it a config entry
[18:03:08] <iangcarroll> though usually my config files just end up reading from env variables
[23:01:04] <iangcarroll> gsingh93: gonna make the post?
[23:01:12] <gsingh93> yea
[23:01:15] <gsingh93> i'll do it now
[23:02:09] <gsingh93> you should get the check to make sure only people in the group can vote done in a few days
[23:05:31] <gsingh93> iangcarroll: can you mark yourself as running?
[23:06:28] <iangcarroll> sigh, fine
[23:06:31] <iangcarroll> and yea
[23:08:01] <gsingh93> "You've been nominated by three people to run as a moderator for the next term"
[23:08:05] <gsingh93> forgot to change this to two
[23:09:02] <iangcarroll> whoops
[23:09:39] <iangcarroll> fixed
[23:14:09] <iangcarroll> hard to compete with jason's bio
[23:17:07] <iangcarroll> hm I never tested to see if this preserves linebreaks lol
[23:19:16] <iangcarroll> there we go
[23:19:24] <iangcarroll> one candidate closer to having enough candidates to elect