On 1/6/16 2:23 PM, Andrea Faulds wrote: > Hi, > > Sara Golemon wrote: >>> So, I'm all for a mediation team, but no sanction, even temporary, >>> without a >>> public vote. >>> >> I'm glad you and I agree on this. > > There is the risk with public votes that whoever votes a particular > way gets harassed for the way they voted. While this doesn't happen > very much in technical discussions, I think there's a greater risk of > that in a vote on whether to sanction a person for unacceptable behaviour.
FWIW, there are two variations of the definition of 'public vote'. I believe that the main context here, is that the 'details at that point would be brought up publicly', so that everyone would be able to review the report/details, and then vote upon the sanction. That does not have to imply (though it can). That the actual ballots of that vote, would be necessity be required to be public themselves. And I can see pros/cons that could be argued either way there. If ... the information is made public at that point, but the ballots are kept in private, then that alleviates your concern there Andrea. Eli -- | Eli White | http://eliw.com/ | Twitter: EliW |
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
