Hi,I think we can establish a limitation between "secret" and "wiser secret". I can understand that making vote transparent and secret is likely not possible. And I am not sure that it is the purpose. The purpose is not to see displayed on a public website one name related to a GR and a vote. In other words, while I dont think someone will do a detailed investigation to know who voted what (most people just will not want to spend energy for this), anyone, including with malicious purpose, can visit a web page to see what I voted and do harasment then. While I accept not to be in a full secret, as I am not afraid with persons who can do harasment to spend so energy to find this info in a deep server or via a hash or whatever, I am worry bif any mad guy can see what I voted about a GR as I know the person will not hesitate to attack me. Again, we have an example of this, of high flame, during RMS GR, and while the most radical persons probably did not want to do deep investigations about voters, I think they were ready to visit a page and go after voters. I dont know if it happent effectively, but given how the vote happent with trials to disturb after the campaign time, it is possible.
The last thing which may justify a such ballot is the idea that "if you dont want to see your name related to a vote, just dont vote, you dont have to do it, you are free". this may be acceptable for political GRs, but more a problem for ambiguous situations.
Hence the importance to make secret possible at least, if not general and mandatory.
Jean-Philippe MENGUAL Debian Developer non uploading Community team member Accessibility team member debian-l10n-french team member President of Debian France non-profit organization Le 04/03/2022 à 12:41, Tiago Bortoletto Vaz a écrit :
On Fri, Mar 04, 2022 at 12:14:56PM +0100, Pierre-Elliott Bécue wrote:Mattia Rizzolo <mattia@debian.org> wrote on 04/03/2022 at 12:03:22+0100:[[PGP Signed Part:Signature made by expired key 0816B9E18C762BAD Mattia Rizzolo <mattia@mapreri.org> ]] 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. 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.Is init systems GR a political GR? I'm pretty sure some gave double thoughts before voting because of the shitstorm/flame that had happened before the vote.Not only that, but also conflicts of interest involving an employer may have influence over a non-political vote (or the willingness to vote). This has been argued already it seems. Bests, -- Tiago