From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3926113877A for ; Thu, 17 Jul 2014 14:12:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 5ECA5E09CC; Thu, 17 Jul 2014 14:12:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id ADD48E092B for ; Thu, 17 Jul 2014 14:12:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [IPv6:2001:470:1f07:93:48b:56c7:78ec:317] (unknown [IPv6:2001:470:1f07:93:48b:56c7:78ec:317]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: ryao) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id ECC0B33FFD1 for ; Thu, 17 Jul 2014 14:12:46 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] Gentoo Council Elections Results for term 2014-2015 References: <53C7202F.1050404@gentoo.org> <53C72B84.9050605@gentoo.org> <53C7B59A.8090605@gentoo.org> <53C7B852.8070708@gentoo.org> <53C7BE51.3040605@gentoo.org> From: Richard Yao Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: iPad Mail (11D201) In-Reply-To: <53C7BE51.3040605@gentoo.org> Message-Id: <200D2AE5-F02A-41BA-A6E2-7B8AB8FCCAFF@gentoo.org> Date: Thu, 17 Jul 2014 10:12:45 -0400 To: "gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Project discussion list X-BeenThere: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org Reply-To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0) X-Archives-Salt: 8540c4c0-8813-45da-a4c2-3c0c19389937 X-Archives-Hash: fe80643d76fe235e9508f11add8dc30f It is regrettable that the leak occurred, but I think the impact of the leak= is overblown. If any council member feels that his ability to make sound te= chnical judgments was compromised by the leak, then he should resign. If non= e believe that they have been compromised, then I see no reason to worry abo= ut "bad winners". We presumably voted on our perceptions of the technical de= cisions that others would make. Knowledge of how people voted is irrelevant i= n making technical decisions. That being said, I am concerned about retribution in the form of harassment f= rom the losers. Such behavior has no place in an open source project, but I f= ear that not everyone subscribes to this ideal. Little can be done about tho= se that do not, but c'est la vie. The most we can do now is to endeavor to prevent recurrences of this leak. I= think it is important that the election officials not "beat themselves up" o= ver this. Nothing is a better teacher than experience and any feelings of re= gret are best channelled into the positive outlet of being more careful in t= he future. e.g. making a checklist of what to do and another checklist of wh= at not to do. > On Jul 17, 2014, at 8:15 AM, "Anthony G. Basile" wro= te: >=20 >> On 07/17/14 07:49, hasufell wrote: >> Dirkjan Ochtman: >>>> On Thu, Jul 17, 2014 at 1:38 PM, hasufell wrote: >>>> Doesn't that make the vote invalid? >>>=20 >>> I don't see why it would. Maybe if voters would have known in advance >>> that their votes might be compromised. >>=20 >> IMO, it doesn't matter if the violation had an effect on the result. It >> matters that there was a violation of procedure. >=20 > Unfortunately it does have an effect since council members now know who vo= ted for them and who didn't and this can make for bad feelings, impartiality= etc. I'm not sure how to deal with this since a re-vote will not make this= knowledge go away. While not a perfect solution, maybe we should just try t= o ignore it as much as possible? >=20 > --=20 > Anthony G. Basile, Ph.D. > Gentoo Linux Developer [Hardened] > E-Mail : blueness@gentoo.org > GnuPG FP : 1FED FAD9 D82C 52A5 3BAB DC79 9384 FA6E F52D 4BBA > GnuPG ID : F52D4BBA >=20