Sorry, but even as blunt and transparent as I am, this is not true, for two reasons:

• Just because someone believes something doesn't make it true. Lots of people believe in everything from invisible pink unicorns to flying spagetti monsters. That doesn't make any of them true.
• The other is that just because something is true doesn't mean it's meant to be known publicly. In fact some things can be true until they are known publicly, at which point it's no longer true. (See below.)

I'll use this as an example. Suppose someone at Samsung told Council something in confidence, say about a future takeover of Nokia and revival of the Maemo line. (Not, this is not fact, it's fantasy...) That would be awesome for the community to know in advance, but something they probably would not at liberty to actually disclose publicly until it happened. Posting that information publicly could damage that deal or kill it. At a minimum, it would destroy any future chances at getting advanced information, even though it's "the truth".

There are times when discretion and privacy are important.

We've had people being very upset that they were casually referred to in a Council meeting in an off-hand (and probably off-color) joke. Imagine if the per-Council vote, on who voted for whom, were made public. Imagine if every person in the CA had their merits disclosed, and reasoning for which person was better for a CA award in the opinion of each Council member. Do you think that wouldn't result in a firestorm? Yet doing just that was needed in order to make sure our decisions were based on true information, and for us to share knowledge from different parts of the community (because none of us is an expert in all areas of the Community.).

Something on this topic but not said earlier on the closed thread, because I was away for the weekend:

Reality TV is not the real world. Citing "Dancing with the Stars" as a real-life voting system is like saying Matlock is how most court cases are handled. Simon Cowell can be a complete àss because he doesn't have to later interact with the people he's bad-mouthing. Nor is he trying to build and maintain a community that cooperates and gets things done. In one-off, one-shot, total time-wasting, BS shows, you can vote publicly and harshly, because you don't need to care if that vote or it's reasoning is damaging to the individual or the community.

In communities where everyone will continue to live and work together after a political schism, voting must be private. The only exception is if the community is small, open, and tolerant enough to accept differences and self-criticism without forming grudges, cliques, or inter-group discrimination. This community, like most around the globe, does not have that quality.