My fellow nerds,

    I'm snipping *a lot* but in brief I definitely agree with Julie.

> Kyle’s main issue was really a question about what to do with 
> private and anonymous feedback – not that we should avoid it, but rather we 
> should discuss how that should be handled.  For example, could someone summarize 
> it, remove identifying details, and report back to the group?  Not about the 
> Duty Officer candidacy, since those are personnel issues, but rather about other 
> feedback about harassment, etc.  If we !
> have those channels, what do we do with the information that is received through 
> them?


    How about treating this like a security bug, since essentially it is? The workflow I tend to see for that sort of starts with going to a closed group initially, a fix being worked out RIGHT MEOW, and ends its journey with a report of what the problem was l8trz. In the case of harassment, I don't think it will ever be appropriate to know the name of the person that felt harassed, but it would almost certainly be good for everyone to eventually know precisely what happened so it's not repeated in future.

    For many reasons, I like the anonymous feedback mechanism that is built in currently.