I have a different view on 'transparency': something is 'transparent' if you can see the internals of that thing at any given moment. Time is a critical factor

I have a different view on 'transparency': something is 'transparent' if you can see the internals of that thing at any given moment. Time is a critical factor for transparency: What if, instead of the next meeting being in a month (where we hope this will be discussed), it was in a year? 2 years? 10? People have finite attention spans. There's probably a well-intentioned, innocuous explanation as to why the process has been set up like this: I imagine the time delay is intended to give people time to consider the issue (reducing the chances of irrational emotional outbursts, increasing the chances of rational discussion). However, introducing a delay between 'decision' and 'revelation' of the internal machinations behind the decision creates greater scope for people to act in bad faith. This seems at odds with what (I think) is the function of transparency. Whether this is an acceptable trade-off is a separate issue.