Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Debian decides to allow secret votes

lwn.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 280 posts

Re: Debian decides to allow secret votes

#161

Post by incomingpain »

rlpb wrote: post #148
incomingpain wrote: post #132

Quoted post unavailable.

I think it's misleading to claim that this came about due to "infighting". It came about due to https://www.debian.org/vote/2021/vote_002 leading to DDs fearing being individually targeted due to how they did or did not vote. On technical matters, I support the idea that voters' reputations be affected by their voting record. On matters like this vote (please read it!), not so much. Maybe it's OK for the voting recor…

>It came about due to https://www.debian.org/vote/2021/vote_002 leading to DDs fearing being individually targeted due to how they did or did not vote.

This is but 1 example; but this alone literally is called infighting. Your example proves me right. Let's not forget how debian also went after Linus. How they have gone after how many other developers?

>On matters like this vote (please read it!), not so much. Maybe it's OK for the voting record to be public, but any individual harassment that might follow would be out of order and is a good reason to make such votes private.

Oh I understand all too well what's going on.

Re: Debian decides to allow secret votes

#162

Post by mxmilkiib »

azornathogron wrote: post #78
mlindner wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're phrasing of "sunlight to disinfect the voting process" is rather disgusting personally... You try to twist something that's quite horrible, namely voter corruption through public opinion as if it is somehow "disinfecting" anything. The mob mentality of the internet is best kept away from any voting base.

The phrase "sunlight is the best disinfectant" has a fairly long history [1], having been used in both metaphorical and literal senses. [1] https://quoteinvestigator.com/2020/09/22/sunlight/

Also stuff like https://sunlightfoundation.com

Re: Debian decides to allow secret votes

#163

Post by dagw »

gregmac wrote: post #119
toast0 wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If those two were represented as a single "NOTA" option, that option would have won the ballot in terms of votes. If the ballot were different, the results would be too. You can't take the results of one ballot and mush them around to support a hypothetical result; see also counting of the 'popular vote' for US president, a ballot which has never been tried, and whose results are unknowable. A vote for 4 says (to m…

> see also counting of the 'popular vote' for US president, a ballot which has never been tried, and whose results are unknowable. I don't follow this point. I'm not an American, but my understanding is counting via simple popular vote vs "electoral college" doesn't change the ballot itself, you still vote for the president directly; it just changes the way the ballots are counted. Are you suggesting either something…

or that people would making a different vote if it was counted differently?

Two changes would happen. A lot of people who don't vote today because their state either heavily favours the 'wrong' candidate or the 'right' candidate will already win by a massive margin, would start voting, since all of sudden their vote matters a lot more.

Secondly, and more importantly, candidates would campaign very differently. In todays system gaining 1-2 percentage points in swing states like Arizona, Georgia or North Carolina is worth infinitely more than gaining 5 percentage point in California, New York or Massachusetts, and politicians on both sides campaign accordingly. In a popular vote scenario those extra 5 points in California could swing the election which would change the entire focus of not only the campaign, but possibly even the type of policy and even candidates that the parties put forwards.

Re: Debian decides to allow secret votes

#164

Post by incomingpain »

antihero wrote: post #156
incomingpain wrote: post #132

Quoted post unavailable.

> They have so much infighting at debian that people are afraid to vote publicly and transparently? Doesn't pretty much every western democracy have anonymous voting so people can pick what they actually want to without without fear of reprisal?

>Doesn't pretty much every western democracy have anonymous voting so people can pick what they actually want to without without fear of reprisal?

Yes, but Debian principles are transparency.

Like I completely understand and agree that the change to secret voting is counter to their project.

But I also understand why they suddenly need secrecy.

Re: Debian decides to allow secret votes

#165

Post by dotancohen »

hutzlibu wrote: post #105
dotancohen wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't. But I am addressing the fact that there exist situations in which it would be beneficial.

Maybe, but if you have those situations with friends/family, then there is probably something else horrible wrong in the first place. (even though it might be common)

Agreed.

Re: Debian decides to allow secret votes

#166

Post by colechristensen »

throwaway82652 wrote: post #127
sjmm1989 wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Stopped using Debian a long time ago, and this is just making me glad I did exactly that. What kind of hairbrained nimrod came up with that idea!? You can't have mixed voting methods and still call it fair in any respect. Any chance there could be tampering should be considered not just to be happening, but to be assured to happen. "Secret ballots" of any sort when everyone else is not partaking in said "Secret ballo…

>Stopped using Debian a long time ago >I'll be using a different version of Linux. I'm not disagreeing with the rest of your reply, but these are nonsensical statements in context. It's presenting an assumption that the governance systems in other versions are better. I've seen a lot of projects with BDFL leaders and no voting whatsoever. Linux itself is famous for permanently keeping a BDFL in charge and not really…

With secret voting you can deflect responsibility and not really hold anybody accountable, with a benevolent dictator... er, well it can't be anybody but Linus' fault as all decisions flow through him.

Re: Debian decides to allow secret votes

#167

Post by rlpb »

incomingpain wrote: post #161
rlpb wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it's misleading to claim that this came about due to "infighting". It came about due to https://www.debian.org/vote/2021/vote_002 leading to DDs fearing being individually targeted due to how they did or did not vote. On technical matters, I support the idea that voters' reputations be affected by their voting record. On matters like this vote (please read it!), not so much. Maybe it's OK for the voting recor…

>It came about due to https://www.debian.org/vote/2021/vote_002 leading to DDs fearing being individually targeted due to how they did or did not vote. This is but 1 example; but this alone literally is called infighting. Your example proves me right. Let's not forget how debian also went after Linus. How they have gone after how many other developers? >On matters like this vote (please read it!), not so much. Maybe…

I'm not sure that the threats of harassment actually came from Debian. Remember: Debian does (nearly) everything in public. People participating on the mailing lists aren't necessarily members of the Debian project.

Re: Debian decides to allow secret votes

#168

Post by incomingpain »

mjw1007 wrote: post #145
incomingpain wrote: post #132

Quoted post unavailable.

I don't think it's about infighting. Debian's constitution says the Debian Developers may vote to publish "position statements about issues of the day", and some developers want to use those for the sort of political statement that might make people angry with them.

>I don't think it's about infighting.

Maybe I used the wrong word? Another comment also disagrees.

infighting: Prolonged and often bitter dissension or rivalry among members of a group or organization. Example: Bureaucratic infighting.

>Debian's constitution says the Debian Developers may vote to publish "position statements about issues of the day", and some developers want to use those for the sort of political statement that might make people angry with them.

I would agree that they used to have a requirement for transparency and this change is an affront to the community.

The problem or reason why this is changing is the real big deal. They have a mass developer exodus. People don't feel safe having a public vote anymore. This is because they fear retribution. That is infighting.

Re: Debian decides to allow secret votes

#169

Post by charlieok »

danuker wrote: post #18
the_lonely_road wrote: post #4

Apparently by a single vote and the legitimacy of the vote is in question due to some technicality I didn't care to reread until I understood. What I don't understand is why the project is NOT already secret voting? Do not most free democratic countries practice 'secret ballot' voting specifically because not doing so caused all kinds of problems like voter intimidation? I googled the first three that came to mind (f…

I am not familiar with Debian's practices, but electronic voting can't work for a nation because: - centralization (there must be a central, corruptible place where the voters are authenticated or the votes are counted) - software is untrustable: https://www.win.tue.nl/%7Eaeb/linux/hh/thompson/trust.html The USA has had a Diebold voting scandal. Other countries are using a paper-based voting process which can be supe…

While not built for the purpose of voting, there have occasionally been some coin-weighted polls using the Zcash blockchain. The ability to post encrypted and immutable transactions, and selectively share viewing keys has interesting possibilities, certainly.

That said, we in the Zcash community have usually used another system when holding secret-ballot votes within our community: Helios.

https://vote.heliosvoting.org/

Re: Debian decides to allow secret votes

#170

Post by turbinerneiter »

the_lonely_road wrote: post #4

Apparently by a single vote and the legitimacy of the vote is in question due to some technicality I didn't care to reread until I understood. What I don't understand is why the project is NOT already secret voting? Do not most free democratic countries practice 'secret ballot' voting specifically because not doing so caused all kinds of problems like voter intimidation? I googled the first three that came to mind (f…

Secret voting is done in elections, but voting in parliaments is not secret.

The politicians in a parliament should vote publicly, so they can be held accountable for their voting behavior. The people want to check if the politicians they elected actually vote for the things they promised in parliament.

(In the case of Debian: I have no idea if this situation is more like an election or voting in parliament, and I have no opinion on the topic.)

Post reply on HN