Re: Yes to Publicity! Not to Anonimity! Was: Re: GNOME Foundation Annual Elections - proposal

[Danilo Segan <dsegan gmx net>]

уторак, 16. септембар 2003. 18:08:55 CEST — Murray Cumming Comneon com  
написа:
> The only difference that seems to be relevant to you is that the  
> GNOME foundation is smaller, and we are more likely to know each  
> other. So maybe you would prefer the analogy of voting for mayor in a  
> small U.S. town.
> Shouldn't those votes be secret too?
Now thinking of it, I believe all the give nanalogies are bad. If I  
consider all the mentioned examples (US congress voting being public,  
people vote anonymously), I would think the following:
- Gnome *users* all over the world would vote anonymously for members
 of Gnome foundation
- Gnome foundation members should vote publicly

Alas, Gnome foundation is *not* consisted of the members chosen by the  
Gnome users at large, so this analogy *fails* too.
So, lets stop with analogies, and consider the situation:

- Security implications are the same unless proven otherwise (I've  
already explained it in one of my previous mails)
- Anonimity enables one to vote regardless of interrelations with any  
candidate, thereby giving a more honest vote
The only concern that "anonimity" has brought us is the concern of  
enabling frauds. Since we're a community that is well equiped with  
capable folks, I believe there's someone who can come with a solution  
to all the issues, so as to bring the frauds to bearable level (note  
this: there's no system that would be free from any fraud, including  
immoral campaigns, lies cast during it, and so on).
Still, as I have already mentioned, whoever is concerned with this has  
enough reason to be concerned about it with the current system too.
> Temujin gets my vote.
I've counted already three votes for Temujin.
(Perhaps I should have kept track of *who* voted, so I would know that  
all those were cast by Murray :-).

Cheers,
Danilo