3 ms·

Yes, that's how democratic systems function. If Congress passed laws by anonymous vote, individual voters would have no way of knowing if their representative i

Yes, that's how democratic systems function. If Congress passed laws by anonymous vote, individual voters would have no way of knowing if their representative is undermining their will. Likewise, members on the TSC likely represent constituent interests (or I would hope they do).

koolba 9y ago
This isn't a democratic system. My understanding of how it's organized is that it's more of a politburo. Election of a new member, or eviction of an existing one, is done by existing membership and there's no public voting to elect any of the members. I see nothing wrong with having a private vote for something as sensitive as kicking someone out. It's no different than keeping jury deliberations private.
- AaronFriel 9y ago
  Hm. Perhaps you're right. I think it's fair for people to wonder this question aloud without being thought "scary", though, don't you? I mean, from the perspective of say, folks that feel they were harassed (hypothetically), they would want to know who they should feel comfortable expressing their concerns to in the future, and who is or is not sympathetic to those concerns. Private votes that don't align with public behavior would also be concerning, and private votes encourage deceptive acts. For what it's worth, when Congress votes to censure, impeach, or remove, these are public votes. I don't think the jury analogy is quite apt, as the people voting were not selected in that manner. Is that fair?
  - geofft 9y ago
    > I mean, from the perspective of say, folks that feel they were harassed (hypothetically), they would want to know who they should feel comfortable expressing their concerns to in the future, and who is or is not sympathetic to those concerns. Private votes that don't align with public behavior would also be concerning, and private votes encourage deceptive acts. I think that this is an extremely important point, given that the CoC says that the reporting path is an email alias that goes to the entire TSC. If the CoC's reporting path were some other group, I think it'd be a very different situation. (There are of course downsides to having a separate antiharassment group that has different power in the project from the core team, and may end up disagreeing with the core team, but it would avoid this particular problem.)

koolba 9y ago

This isn't a democratic system. My understanding of how it's organized is that it's more of a politburo. Election of a new member, or eviction of an existing one, is done by existing membership and there's no public voting to elect any of the members. I see nothing wrong with having a private vote for something as sensitive as kicking someone out. It's no different than keeping jury deliberations private.

AaronFriel 9y ago
Hm. Perhaps you're right. I think it's fair for people to wonder this question aloud without being thought "scary", though, don't you? I mean, from the perspective of say, folks that feel they were harassed (hypothetically), they would want to know who they should feel comfortable expressing their concerns to in the future, and who is or is not sympathetic to those concerns. Private votes that don't align with public behavior would also be concerning, and private votes encourage deceptive acts. For what it's worth, when Congress votes to censure, impeach, or remove, these are public votes. I don't think the jury analogy is quite apt, as the people voting were not selected in that manner. Is that fair?
- geofft 9y ago
  > I mean, from the perspective of say, folks that feel they were harassed (hypothetically), they would want to know who they should feel comfortable expressing their concerns to in the future, and who is or is not sympathetic to those concerns. Private votes that don't align with public behavior would also be concerning, and private votes encourage deceptive acts. I think that this is an extremely important point, given that the CoC says that the reporting path is an email alias that goes to the entire TSC. If the CoC's reporting path were some other group, I think it'd be a very different situation. (There are of course downsides to having a separate antiharassment group that has different power in the project from the core team, and may end up disagreeing with the core team, but it would avoid this particular problem.)