Holacracy Community of Practice Archive, 2015-2019 Community Holacracy Web Site

I answer to [@mention:455886150941203371] on his 12/17/18 post.

I stayed with thoughts around this answer, I'm not in the same paradigm :

I see that the source of your thought is in "**I suspect** that it's going to be in the likelihood that voting will become politicized."
It states "you do not want someone abstaining because **they're afraid** to make their opinion transparent, so voting isn't a choice."
That's a guess, you do not know what's in their head or why they want to abstain

You don't "feel super-confident in this answer because he has never practiced the process without requiring everyone to vote"

So the value of forcing someone to vote is that of **ensuring that voting will not become politicized.**
I think we don't need that value   

**For my part, I do not want to be fear driven. I want to be purpose and process driven**

I've no fear with the politization because of the election process. it is the framework that protects from the effect of politicization.
If one abstains and lets the group decide for him, for example because he has no tension with the election of one or the other, it does not frighten me. If later he has an objection, the process will test it and if necessary, will integrate it.

as you suggested; I posted a proposal on ghithub, the complete discussion is [here](https://github.com/holacracyon.../295#issue-391051211)