On Fri, Apr 09, 2021 at 01:12:26PM -0400, Sam Hartman wrote: > On another list, there was discussion of the DPL encouraging the > secretary to make the vote on the rms GR secret.
I'm not sure this is not leaking. > I argued on another list that[...] > Several people agreed with me, ande one person disagreed. Again, I'd consider this leaking from that other list which has a no-leaking policy. If you don't like that, better don't use that other list. (I unsubscribed because I've been (too) annoyed by discussions happening there which should happen in public.) That said, I think it's a *very* bad idea to change the vote procedure during an ongoing vote. Really *bad* idea and precedence. Double more so on a vote with shortened discussion period. (plus secret voting is a *really really really* hard problem.) I also don't fear that much of a changed outcome. It seems 117 Debian people (most of them voters I believe) signed https://rms-open-letter.github.io/ and https://vote.debian.org/~secretary/gr_rms/ counts 268 valid votes, so, based on that *and* on the discussion here now and in the past, I don't think a few people who fear to vote what they think because then their opinion could become public will make a big difference. Most people made public statements already anyway. Also: they vote has been started as a public vote, it was shortened as a public vote and it's technically complete unclear what "secret" would mean here (and to whom and for how long). But, to be clear, change outcome of the vote is not my concern here. Changing the way we vote, in a rush, from what will be perceived as a cabal, is my concern. -- cheers, Holger ⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ ⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ holger@(debian|reproducible-builds|layer-acht).org ⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ PGP fingerprint: B8BF 5413 7B09 D35C F026 FE9D 091A B856 069A AA1C ⠈⠳⣄ I'm looking forward to Corona being a beer again and Donald a duck.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
