Web   ·   Wiki   ·   Activities   ·   Blog   ·   Lists   ·   Chat   ·   Meeting   ·   Bugs   ·   Git   ·   Translate   ·   Archive   ·   People   ·   Donate

#sugar-meeting, 2015-11-03

 « Previous day | Index | Today | Next day »     Channels | Search | Join

All times shown according to UTC.

Time Nick Message
00:00 walterbender we've been discussing the election
00:00 kaametza walterbender, well choicemmaking is a process that does not by nature need rto be private
00:01 walterbender kaametza, I would love to (1) make it easier for people to vote; (2) make it easier for people to run as candiates; but I don
00:01 t understand how making the votes themselves public helps in any way
00:01 I think it would cause some people to not vote
00:02 I don't see how it would encourage more voting
00:02 do you have some data to suggest otherwise?
00:05 kaametza well guess there are different perspectives, I do like the idea of a public vote..
00:05 it somehow makes the hole election more interesting to follow ;D
00:10 another important benfit is that it abosulty secures the results are the OK, as you get "distributed oversight"
00:11 Quozl` but it fails to generate correct results if the results are published as the election is happening.  distributed oversight only works properly if it happens after election period closes.
00:12 kaametza I think you are correct on that Quozl`
00:13 meeting <Jose_Miguel-es> In accordance with *Quozl`...
00:13 Quozl` so it is up to the board if they would like distributed oversight.  i don't mind either way, i'm observing.
00:13 meeting <Jose_Miguel-es> And in accordance with Walter. No  if do it opened will improve the election.
00:14 Quozl` it depends on what improve the election means.
00:14 if the true problem is "nobody will vote", then face that problem squarely.
00:15 kaametza anything that makes things more transparent improves must ecosystems these days :o)
00:16 TonyF I would be reluctant to vote if public because a) offend friends b) vote might be not well thought out
00:16 walterbender kaametza, can you point to something I can read so I can understand better why you think this would improve things
00:17 kaametza no, but that's not the way we change the world, right?
00:17 walterbender kaametza, I don't understand
00:17 Quozl` TonyF: exactly, a matter of trust within the membership.  what to trust; the process of election, or the other members?
00:18 walterbender do we have any evidence of fraud or distrust?
00:19 Quozl` walterbender: only material evidence i've seen is a troll on a mailing list.
00:20 walterbender Quozl`, that trolling is not related to how we hold elections as far as I recall
00:20 Quozl` true, or not yet anyway.
00:21 icarito it was suggested by Canoeberry that there might be a conflict of interest if kaametza ran as candidate as I am in the membership/election committee
00:21 Cerlyn <Cerlyn!~ALIEN@107-143-88-205.lightspeed.miamfl.sbcglobal.net> has joined #sugar-meeting
00:21 icarito I think it would contribute to dissipate any possibility of tamper with the votes
00:21 if each can validate their vote as counted
00:21 otherwise, membership will have to trust whoever runs the counting code
00:22 governance doesn't say vote is anonymous
00:23 walterbender icarito, true... but that doesn't make it the right thing to do
00:23 Quozl` the convention in government elections for a country is to protect against voter manipulation, but that doesn't seem likely here, as the stakes are low.
00:23 walterbender icarito, kaametza there is a great deal of literature on elections
00:23 kaametza well It would make a diference in my case
00:23 walterbender if we are going to do this, it would be incumbent on the committee to present some evidence that it is an improvement
00:24 kaametza I won't be able to run a candiate if vote is not public
00:25 walterbender kaametza, there is no reason why we cannot have a 3rd party do the actual running of the survey, isolating you from any insinuation of vote-tampering
00:25 icarito walterbender if you can think of another way to make the vote 100% transparent, I do think it's the simplest
00:26 walterbender icarito, as several of us have already mentioned, there are trade-offs
00:26 transparency of the counting of ballots is not the only issue
00:26 Quozl` is there any evidence that vote publication distorts voting?
00:27 walterbender and in fact, access to ballots and intimidation are big issues in US elections
00:27 the miscounts are noise compared to intimidation'
00:27 so yes, there is evidence that it is a bad idea
00:27 so that is why I am asking for counterevidence
00:28 Quozl` i wouldn't consider the US election system up as a particularly useful form of governance, but if that's what the members are mostly living in, then that's what they will expect.  what are the countries represented by members?
00:29 walterbender Quozl`, you asked for an example
00:29 Quozl`, I am not an expert, but I am also not convinced we are solving a real problem and not causing more problems
00:29 kaametza I do agree that the US political system might not be a good example to follow
00:30 walterbender so I would like someone to make an argument that is not just handwavng
00:31 and what does the US political system have to do with the US voting system?
00:31 they are not one and the same
00:31 Quozl` okay, in annual general meetings of corporations, and associations in australia, it is acceptable practice (and regulated) to elect by a show of hands, unless a sufficient proportion of the members present decide that the vote should be secret ballot.
00:32 kaametza I wonder if other members of the board feel the same way about public vote
00:32 walterbender kaametza, JM__ and Claudia_ are here
00:32 Quozl` also, the question is entirely moot if the number of candidates is less than or equal to the number of positions.
00:33 meeting <Jose_Miguel-es> I do not think that the open vote was guarantee of at all...
00:33 walterbender Quozl`, and that is yet another data point we need to discuss: is an open ballot going to encourage or discourage candidates.
00:33 is there evidence one way or another?
00:33 meeting <Jose_Miguel-es> It seems me that it can generate rejection. Perhaps we have a strong tradition in *UY
00:34 kaametza there is a need to over come all rejection fears
00:34 in the name of good gobernance :D
00:34 walterbender also, the argument for an open ballot is ensure integrity of the voie? there are other ways to ensure that
00:34 kaametza, why?
00:35 kaametza because we are the example the young ones are following, we need to have no fear of been active in politics and see how commun structures evolve
00:36 walterbender kaametza, I don't follow your argument
00:37 Quozl` reference, model constituion for incorporated associations in new south wales, australia.  http://www.fairtrading.nsw.gov[…]constitution.page ... section 30, making of decisions.  section 15, ballot for electing committee uses a method directed by the committee.
00:37 walterbender I don't see why participation need to go hand-in-hand with the type of transparency you are suggestting
00:37 meeting <Jose_Miguel-es> The list of open member, the permanent publications, give transparencies...
00:37 walterbender Quozl`, is that how or why? /me reads
00:37 kaametza some one once told me (on a public IRC meeting) i should run as a candidate because there would be a " conflict of interest" with icarito been election commitee, remember?
00:38 Quozl` what countries are the majority of members living in.
00:38 walterbender: no, it is not why.
00:39 walterbender kaametza, we can insulate you by having someone other than icarito administer the election
00:39 kaametza I see no harm in going with public votes, and yes it would be a way to reduce all " conflict of intrest" paranoia :D
00:39 walterbender I am certain we can find a "neutral" party
00:40 kaametza, sop you discount the reasons we have stated?
00:41 I would like to know why you discount them
00:41 what is the evidence?
00:43 kaametza walterbender, there are only good intentions
00:43 walterbender @ Quozl` "Before adopting the Model constitution an association should consider its suitability for the association "
00:43 kaametza, no one is suggesting otherwise
00:44 but some of us have concerns that an open ballot may cause some issues
00:44 and we are looking for assurance that it will not
00:46 kaametza I really want to help with Sugar Labs Over Sigth Board, but I won't present my self as candidate if the votes are not public
00:47 :O)
00:47 Quozl` walterbender: yes, an association would have to have good reasons for not finding it suitable.  it does happen.
00:48 walterbender kaametza, you won't consider other mechanisms for ensuring impartiality?
00:48 that is only solution you will accept?
00:49 Quozl` walterbender: i agree that a secret ballot has advantages; hinders voter supression, hinders intimidation, hinders vote buying, but i don't see those things as likely or in evidence in the sugar labs membership.
00:50 walterbender Quozl`, well, we heard otherwise from a member in this discussion
00:50 icarito it's not unheard of to propose open voting http://www.researchgate.net/pu[…]l_for_open_voting I find it hard to imagine that there will be bribes or intimidation in Sugar Labs
00:50 kaametza fear for friends rejection might not be the advisor on who should rull these days
00:51 walterbender kaametza, I don't understand
00:52 Quozl` one can always not vote if there is a fear of rejection.  i'm not planning to vote, as i'm not a member.  (and _i_ don't feel i can be a member because of my employment at olpc, inc, creates for me a conflict of interest that _i_ perceive even if others do not).
00:53 s/employment at/contract with/
00:53 walterbender Quozl`, so, would you be willing to run the balloting process?
00:53 that would remove kaametza 's problem
00:53 kaametza walterbender,  fear is not a good advisor, that summarize it
00:53 walterbender and then we can discuss the merits of open ballot without that issue
00:54 Quozl` walterbender: no, i would not run the ballot unless it was open ballot after the election.  with a secret ballot i cannot be guaranteed to be independent.
00:54 walterbender icarito, I haven't read the whole article yet, but just from the abstract, it is far from conclusive. it just suggests it is something to investigate and we need to know more about how to do it right
00:55 kaametza Quozl`, I dont see why you couldn't be active part of SL and still be able to keep you contract with OLPC
00:56 Quozl` kaametza: i am active.  but not as a member.
00:56 walterbender we are going around in circles...
00:57 I suggest that the election committee write up a proposal with pros and cons and the details of how it would work
00:57 TonyF http://miles.oppidi.net/secretballot.pdf discusses the history and philosophy of the secret ballot
00:57 walterbender with some actual citations to literature
00:57 icarito also I don't see why you've made such a big deal of this probably we would've published a dataset, it's not like the votes will be going out on twitter...
00:57 walterbender icarito, why do you say that?
00:58 if it is open, they will go where they go
00:58 icarito i.e. if kaametza hadn't brought it up, I probably would've found it obvious that, for transparency, I would publish a full ballot dataset
00:58 Quozl` icarito: agreed, i thought it was going to be like that, i was surprised walter thought otherwise.
00:59 walterbender maybe I don't understand what you are proposing
00:59 meeting <Jose_Miguel-es> *Perdóin, but have to go out...
00:59 walterbender please write up a proposal and circulate it
00:59 JM__, me too.
00:59 thanks for coming
00:59 Quozl` icarito: some ballot datasets are de-identified.  perhaps you could include that in your proposal.  a token is given to the voter, which they can use later.
01:00 meeting <Jose_Miguel-es> *Bye
01:00 walterbender Quozl`, that is what we had been doing in the past
01:00 meeting * Jose_Miguel has quit (Quit: Page closed)
01:00 walterbender everyone could use their token to see their vote
01:00 icarito yes each person could verify their token was counted
01:00 walterbender and the aggregate results were always available
01:00 but not what any individual voted
01:01 that was kept private
01:01 anyway, I look forward to learning why an open ballot is the right thing to do.
01:01 Quozl` i was expecting the individual tokens could be shared with other voters if the individual chose to.
01:02 walterbender Quozl`, of course. individuals have always had that option
01:03 JM__ has quit IRC
01:03 walterbender is signing off
01:03 any last word before I end the meeting log?
01:03 Quozl` no, go ahead.
01:03 kaametza good night
01:04 walterbender thanks all for attending.
01:04 #end-meeting
01:04 meeting Meeting ended Tue Nov  3 01:04:26 2015 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. (v 0.1.4)
01:04 Minutes: http://meeting.sugarlabs.org/s[…]-02T23:06:41.html
01:04 Log:     http://meeting.sugarlabs.org/s[…]15-11-02T23:06:41
01:05 TonyF has quit IRC
01:10 walterbender has quit IRC
01:24 Claudia_ has quit IRC
01:54 walterbender <walterbender!~walter@146-115-134-246.c3-0.nwt-ubr​1.sbo-nwt.ma.cable.rcn.com> has joined #sugar-meeting
02:09 walterbender has quit IRC
12:07 meeting <meeting!~sugaroid@rev-18-85-44-69.sugarlabs.org> has joined #sugar-meeting
12:11 c0mrad3 <c0mrad3!uid26809@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-wkequdpjkqhtakfx> has joined #sugar-meeting
22:47 meeting * Irma_-es has joined
22:49 <Irma_-es> Hello Walter and community! Apologies, could not assist to the meeting! Embrace! Paz and Well!
22:50 * Irma_ has quit (Client Quit)

 « Previous day | Index | Today | Next day »     Channels | Search | Join

Powered by ilbot/Modified.