[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Reaffirm public voting



El 04/03/22 a las 12:03, Mattia Rizzolo escribió:
> On Fri, Mar 04, 2022 at 10:42:51AM +0000, Holger Levsen wrote:
> > Reaffirm public voting
> > ======================
> > 
> > Since we can either have secret and intransparent voting, or we can have
> > open and transparent voting, the project resolves to leave our voting
> > system as it is.
> > 
> > Rationale:
> > 
> > The GR proposal for secret voting is silent on implenentation details,
> > probably because secret and transparent voting is, well, impossible to
> > achieve fully, so this GR is bound to a similar fate as the 'publish 
> > debian-private' vote, which was voted for and then was never implemented.
> > 
> > A voting system which is transparent only to some, is undemocratic and
> > will lead to few people in the know, which is diagonal to Debians goals
> > of openness and transparency.
> > 
> > And then, early 2022 is not the time for rushed changes like this, which
> > is also why I explicitly want to see "keep the status quo" on the ballot,
> > and not only as "NOTA", but as a real option. 
> > 
> > I'm seeking sponsors for this amendment to the current GR.
> 
> 
> Assuming you meant this as "this ballot" instead of "this amendment"
> (following the new GR flow), I sponsor this.
> 
> 

I sponsor this ballot.

> If I were to add my thoughts: political GRs don't belong in Debian,
> please take them elsewhere.  For non-political votes there is no use
> for private voting.

I think technical is political. Giving freedom to software users is
political.
And I'd rather say we should avoid GRs involving individuals.

Cheeers,

 -- S

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: