exclude people from giving karma?

[Kevin Kofler]

Adam Williamson wrote:
> I really don't know why you make these suggestions. I mean, you must
> know no-one is going to reply "Why, Kevin! What a brilliant idea! We'll
> do so immediately!", so what's the point?

Why not? That's the only reply that possibly makes sense.

It is very obvious that autokarma is NOT working. It is causing way more 
breakage than direct stable pushes (or manual pushes with "too little" 
karma) ever caused. If direct stable pushes (or manual pushes with "too 
little" karma) were so bad a problem, then how can autokarma possibly NOT be 
as bad a problem? This is totally illogical. It's as if airline security 
banned Swiss knifes, but let you board with a machine gun no questions 
asked.

Autokarma has been a bad idea since day one. Add to that that autokarma 
abuse has actually INCREASED with the mandatory karma rules (making them 
counterproductive). But the autokarma problem has always existed, because 
the idea is just fundamentally flawed.

The whole concept that an update is stable because an arbitrary number of 
testers gave it a +1 makes no sense whatsoever. Automatically pushing an 
update with no validation whatsoever is just suicidal.

Dropping autokarma is long overdue. This is yet another incident that proves 
my point!

Told you so,
        Kevin Kofler