I'd like to update the rationale section of my GR to fix a typo and to
better explain the differences between this option and other ballot
options. If sponsors of my option do not have comments I intend to
formally amend my option tomorrow. Sponsors would then have an
additional 24-hours to object.
Rationale
=========
During the vote for GR_2021_002, several developers said they were
uncomfortable voting because under the process at that time, their name
and ballot ranking would be public.
A number of participants in the discussion believe that we would get
election results that more accurately reflect the will of the developers
if we do not make the name associated with a particular vote on the
tally sheet public.
Several people believed that the ranked votes without names attached
would still be valuable public information.
This proposal would treat all elections like DPL elections.
At the same time it relaxes the requirement that the secretary must
conduct a vote via email. If the requirement for email voting is
removed, then an experiment is planned at least with the belenios voting
system [1]. belenios may provide better voter secrecy and an easier
web-based voting system than our current email approach.
If this proposal passes, adopting such an alternative
would require sufficient support in the project but would not require
another constitutional amendment.
[1]: https://lists.debian.org/YhoTRIxtz3AIpO+g@roeckx.be
This proposal increases our reliance on the secretary's existing power
to decide how votes are conducted. The lack of an override mechanism
for secretary decisions about how we conduct votes has not been a
problem so far. However, if we are going to rely on this power to
consider questions like whether the project has sufficient consensus to
adopt an alternate voting mechanism, we need an override mechanism.
So, this proposal introduces such a mechanism.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature