Re: Draft GR for permitting private discussion

[Ian Jackson <ijackson@chiark.greenend.org.uk>]

Michael Gilbert writes ("Re: Draft GR for permitting private discussion"):
> I feel like this wording comes across as sacrificing too much in the
> openness/transparency of the tech committee's discussions.  Perhaps
> something along the following would be better?
> 
> Discussion, draft resolutions and amendments, and votes by members of
> the committee, are made public on the Technical Committee public
> discussion [-list.-] {+list to the maximum extent possible. There are
> however certain circumstances that require private deliberation, which
> is permissable, but such actions should be kept to a minimum.+}  There
> is no separate secretary for the Committee.

This proposed wording has two bugs:

  - it suggests that the TC doing difficult work that needs private
    discussion (eg, dealing with interpersonal problems, mediation,
    etc.) should be `kept to a minimum'.

  - conversely it permits private decisionmaking!

Ian.