Many good points made, public by default seems fine if we make it clear to users.

I’m not sure I’m clear on what this means? Is it that our “local” feed is public by default? Or that replies to threads are public by default, or something else?

One of the strong attractors of our Mastodon server is the open, social nature of our governance. I say we lean into this and keep things public. It will allow would-be members a better sense of what they would be joining as well.

I use my account as a generally public one, so I like the default as is- public for all.

Making the threads private doesn't seem to provide any benefit and would hinder non-instance members with discovering whether or not this instance is a good fit for them. I read several discussions on Loomio before applying for membership to social. coop.

Changing my vote. Saw at least one person say that seeing the democratic process in our loomio threads helped convince them to join. So, voting yes at this point.

In general, I think it's best that policy discussions be public as much as possible. I can imagine circumstances when we might need a private discussion, but those should be rare, and we should create private threads only when those come up.

Being able to read the public threads was a big factor in wanting to join, for me. The public discussions are an asset. Maybe it should be more clear to users that threads default to public if there are issues there.

Like a lot of other folks, being able to browse and read threads here on Loomio and see the democratic processes at work played a part in my choosing to become a social.coop member. I think we should keep the default as public, while selectively making some threads closed as appropriate.

I don't see any significant benefit to having Loomio threads be private, which to me says the various benefits of openness/transparency (as others have said, being able to observe historical community discussions/decisions before signing up was very nice as a prospective member) win out by default.

Seems fine to let threads be visible; if there is something sensitive to discuss we can always make it private. The more important thing is that we make it clear (I had no idea threads were public).

I think private should be opt-in, chosen when there's some reason for it

Should be public IMO

I like that much of our processes are publicly visible.

At the very least we should be clear about what the default is. We've had more than one confusion in recent weeks when folks were surprised that a Loomio discussion was public.

I think this is a really good idea. I don't have huge privacy concerns myself, but I would worry that people don't feel comfortable speaking freely if the conversations can be made available to anyone.

Is there a reason to close it? I like the open, democratic process here (it's much of why I joined here) -- by and large, I think it sets a good example having the discussions mostly public, so other instances can see how it works.

Obviously, close threads that are in some way sensitive, but I think most are best in the open.

Democratic process should be open to all by default, to participants and non-participants alike.

We should state somewhere obvious that Loomio is open and that there should be no expectation of privacy by users.

Current settings seem fine to me. Having the public threads helped me in consideration of whether to join

I think the proper balance is to have the main group public, for transparency, but working groups members-only (or public if they prefer).

This poll is inappropriately placed in an unrelated thread. Please see a new page in the wiki on best practices in proposal-making: https://wiki.social.coop/Make-a-proposal

Just another voice along the lines of what most people are saying, I love open communications by default, and closed where there is a good reason.

Certain topics should definitely not be public - e.g. if someone realizes that there is a security vulnerability specific to the version of mastodon that we are currently running. That said, it is nice to be able to invite people in with transparency as long as it isn't too big of a risk.

I think the Loomio interface is already an issue for participation. Making it private by default will make it that much harder for people to participate.

There may be certain sensitive topics that we want to make members only. I can’t think of any off hand as a blanket rule.

Let’s keep public-by-default, which should also be a general rule for our documentation and communication.

For the reasons described by others, I would like to preserve the open nature of our governance; and making this clear to our users.

I often want to know what kinds of conversations are happening (and the quality of said conversations) before joining a cooperative organization.

Ditto to clarifying that they are public and leaving them public as the default.

Reasonable arguments both ways. Willing to go with prevailing sentiment. Want to indicate with this vote that I have engaged the question and the space. Peace.

I agree that our loomio threads in general should be public. However, I believe that sensitive threads (such as this one) relating to mediation/negotiation with outside parties or legal issues should be private. Perhaps threads within the legal working group should be private by default?

I am a person with a reserved personality. I would prefer everything be private. On the other hand, I often read the threads on Loomio before the app has logged me in, which I guess wouldn't be possible if we made discussions private. I like the idea of governance being public; and, as others have said, publicly viewable governance discussions attract people to Social.Coop

I think privacy is important when there is so much surveillance online. Those not signed in can join and watch without having to vote. But people should be able to contribute without it being public.

Pleasantly surprised to see for public by default carrying the day here!

To have transparent discussions furthers accountability. In fav to stay in the open unless there is reason to exclude the gen public.

what are the reasons for remaining public vs protecting a somewhat 'confidential' space. Is it fear-based (hackers, malicious agents)? Self-asserting in terms of building internal coherence, vulnerability & trust? I was invited by Mayel way back to learn more about coops and contribute what I can if it seems my skills might be relevant. Has it mattered to me that Loomio is public? No. I wasn't aware of it tbh. Does it change how I'm going to interact going forward? I don't think so...