Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:84926 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 60699 invoked from network); 15 Mar 2015 21:36:17 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 15 Mar 2015 21:36:17 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=dennis@birkholz.biz; spf=unknown; sender-id=unknown Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=dennis@birkholz.biz; sender-id=unknown Received-SPF: unknown (pb1.pair.com: domain birkholz.biz does not designate 144.76.185.252 as permitted sender) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: dennis@birkholz.biz X-Host-Fingerprint: 144.76.185.252 mx01.nexxes.net Received: from [144.76.185.252] ([144.76.185.252:39730] helo=mx01.nexxes.net) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 04/4D-31306-F4BF5055 for ; Sun, 15 Mar 2015 16:36:17 -0500 Received: from [137.226.183.192] (ip3192.saw.rwth-aachen.de [137.226.183.192]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: db220660-p0g-1@packages.nexxes.net) by mx01.nexxes.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9881648244D for ; Sun, 15 Mar 2015 22:36:11 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <5505FB4B.6090905@birkholz.biz> Date: Sun, 15 Mar 2015 22:36:11 +0100 Reply-To: internals@lists.php.net User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: internals@lists.php.net References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Voting irregularities From: dennis@birkholz.biz (Dennis Birkholz) Hi all, Am 15.03.2015 um 15:19 schrieb Anthony Ferrara: > ... There were a number of voters that I didn't recognize. I wondered about who the people are that vote and how they "earned" the right to do so. I think this kind of confusion could be avoided if people.php.net would contain a little more information. Each profile should contain the reason why the person got the voting karma granted (and when maybe). Then you don't stumble over empty profile pages and this kind of discussion is solved until someone bothers to propose an RFC to change voting rules. Thanks for listening Dennis