2 ms·
This is good. Secret ballot empowers voters. Public ballot only makes sense if the voter is a representative of other people and they want their record public f
by _8j50 5y ago
This is good. Secret ballot empowers voters. Public ballot only makes sense if the voter is a representative of other people and they want their record public for continued support.
- jodrellblank 5y agoIt's fine to say "OSS developers don't owe anybody anything" in general, but Debian specifically has quite a strict vetting procedure before accepting people as developers and they agree to things like the Debian Social Contract[1] which includes: "Debian believes the makers of a free software operating system should provide guarantees when a user entrusts them with control of a computer. [...] Not hiding problems with the software or organization. [...] Staying focused on the users and the software that started the phenomenon." and a document of Developer Duties[2]. Seems like there should be few things the developers cannot do openly, but can do secretly if 'empowered', and there perhaps ought to be a public record and transparency around any incidence or accusations of vote-bullying or vote-buying. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debian_Social_Contract https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debian_Social_Contract [2] https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/developers-reference/developer-duties.html https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/developers-reference/deve...
- _8j50 5y agoDoes being secret not protect them from influence? If someone buys their vote, they can take payment and vote however they want? Or if they have an unpopular perspective any loud minority groups of devs would oppose them and cause backlash, they won't have to worry about it. Look at systemd, if you voted against having only one init system back in the day, you would be subject to backlash or it could be understood as support for the Devuan forkers.