Hi, On Mittwoch, 9. Februar 2011, Gunnar Wolf wrote: > First, on anonymizing the requesters: I am _against_ it. It might seem metoo > Second, on anonimyzing the committee (the herb@ members): Not showing > who casted each opinion in Penta is near to trivial (heck, even a > small CSS trick would do), although it does not gain us much. If > people feel seeing other committee members' opinion (either in general > or in particular for a given member) distorts the opinion casted by > following members, we can hide it I'm not actually sure hiding other comments or votes is a good thing. If someone else know $foo is heavily involved in an area I know little about, its help me if see those comments. In past sponsorship rounds I have seen several requests where an "against sponsorship of this person"-attitude was changed into "pro sponsorship" because people learned how valuable that person requesting sponsorship was (for our project). If this doesnt happen, ie people might get downvoted because they have to request a lot money because they live far away. Or because we have little money or whatever. (And I mean "downvoted" as opposed to receiving "neutral" votes. "Downvoting" has worse effects on good people.) cheers, Holger
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.