Update OpenWrt rules

[Rich Brown]

> On Sep 18, 2025, at 09:22, Rich Brown <richb.hanover at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> I am afraid you both are mis-understanding the active/inactive designation. It is true that virtually all OpenWrt contributors switch between "focused on OpenWrt" and "focused on other things". That does not change the intent of these rules.
> 
> The changes to these rules focus on VOTING... As a trusted "active member", we ask that you also use your judgement to weigh in on proposals that come forth from time to time.
> 
> So if you are focused on other things for such a long time that you cannot cast any votes, you will be moved to "inactive" status (after a notification or two). This keeps down the "active member count", so we can achieve a quorum of votes. If you wish to become an active member again, you need only request it.
> 
> Does solve your concern? Thanks.
> 
> PS This is a re-send. I could not send this note to openwrt-adm with a list of 30+ recipients.As Hauke originally requested, please respond only to the openwrt-adm list (cc'd) so that all these responses are recorded. Thanks
> 
> 
>> On Sep 17, 2025, at 08:40, David Woodhouse <dwmw2 at infradead.org> wrote:
>> 
>> On Tue, 2025-09-16 at 23:55 +0200, Hauke Mehrtens wrote
>>> I hope people are not constantly switching between inactive and
>>> activate state.
>> 
>> I suspect they do, to a certain extent. I certainly do.
>> 
>> As with any volunteer project, it goes in phases. Sometimes I'm very
>> busy with the actual day job, sometimes I have a bit of slack to
>> concentrate on 'other' projects, of which OpenWrt is one.
>> 
>> Even the VPN client I wrote and am primary maintainer of, gets
>> neglected at times.
>> 
>> Where contributors are sporadic in their availability, I don't think we
>> should *increase* the barriers to them becoming more active again.
>> 
>