 | | Re: LSC Proposal 0.99
|
|
(...) Both, but moreso that only LSC-eligable. I'd rather the LSC be selected by people who are familiar with the other programmers and potential members, as well as the issues the LSC will be dealing with. I think this is a very important concern, (...) (21 years ago, 6-May-03, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: LSC Proposal 0.99
|
|
(...) huh. (...) you're supporting that only LSC-eligable can vote, or that the ad-hoc group can vote? I think everyone can vote - but if we say that's not so, then I think the ad-hoc part should be removed. Why the special treatment? On Mon, May (...) (21 years ago, 6-May-03, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: LSC Proposal 0.99
|
|
(...) That statement (aside from the ad-hoc addition) was in Version 0.6, the first version I posted publicly. I found it in my local text file, as well as in the post here: (URL) strongly in favor of at least restricting the vote to only those (...) (21 years ago, 5-May-03, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: LSC Proposal 0.99
|
|
(...) I don't believe the beginning part is new (eligible LSC members can vote) it is new, but I added the ad-hoc group in there for those in the ad-hoc who are ineligible for LSC membership. Track Changes didn't highlight it in Word. I am for that (...) (21 years ago, 5-May-03, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: LSC Proposal 0.99
|
|
(...) This is new? Only the committee and people who are eligable for membership in the LSC can vote? I thought we were defining the general membership in LDraw.org so that everyone can vote? I think this paragraph should say: LDraw.org Members will (...) (21 years ago, 5-May-03, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | LSC Proposal 0.99
|
|
I think it's time to post the 0.99 draft of the LSC proposal. I've pasted it below with mo revision marks. You can see an HTML document _with_ revision marks here: (URL) think we're 99% of the way there to having a final draft - and if there are no (...) (21 years ago, 5-May-03, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Parts tracker down?
|
|
I have been unable to access the parts tracker for about a week now. Does anybody know what is going on with it or when the problems will be fixed? (21 years ago, 5-May-03, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Elections and Membership in ldraw.org
|
|
Steve Bliss <steve.bliss@earthlink.net> schrieb im Newsbeitrag news:4pc2bvo3amq7f4a...4ax.com... (...) I hven't read the whole discussion but this is the wound point. I'm not a real LUGNET member because of the payment. I think a membership is'n a (...) (21 years ago, 2-May-03, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Elections and Membership in ldraw.org
|
|
(...) 1..2..3 not me! Seriously though, it's a good idea in the long term, but as you seem to imply, not so feasible in the short term. We have a few more immediate tasks to occupy ourselves, including getting voting up, getting the LSC off the (...) (21 years ago, 2-May-03, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Elections and Membership in ldraw.org
|
|
(...) D'oh! Yeah, I'm for that one. (...) Right. (...) I'm for it as *one potential* method of verification, but not as *the exclusive* method. -Tim (21 years ago, 2-May-03, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Elections and Membership in ldraw.org
|
|
(...) One idea that has (surprisingly?) not come up in this thread is simple recognition of people already in the community. Until LDraw.org gets two people signing up as 'Steve Bliss', there's not much question of my identity. That may or may not (...) (21 years ago, 1-May-03, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Elections and Membership in ldraw.org
|
|
(...) That's not a bad idea, but it leads to the point that someone (or someones) will have to accept the dues, track the moneys, pay the bill(s). So we'll need a treasurer right away. LDraw.org is an international thing, so there could be fees for (...) (21 years ago, 1-May-03, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Moving LDraw.org permanently to Peeron?
|
|
(...) I think it's a good idea. I'm hoping Munin will be more stable now that it's been refreshed, but having a more accessible box is a very good thing. Steve (21 years ago, 1-May-03, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Elections and Membership in ldraw.org
|
|
(...) Right. I (perhaps naiively) assumed the DB cross-checking would help solve that. (...) Cool :-) I'm glad we aren't stuck. -Tim (21 years ago, 30-Apr-03, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Elections and Membership in ldraw.org
|
|
(...) look at Amy's post, and what she pointed out. For making sure each member is unique, the list (that I snipped) doesn't help. But I suggest we move on anyway, and just require a unique working email address for now. We can try to think of other (...) (21 years ago, 30-Apr-03, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Elections and Membership in ldraw.org
|
|
(...) The above set sounds OK to me. (...) I think you've found a good balance by the set above. Todd has mentioned a system for cross-checking IDs for uniqueness elsewhere in this thread, which I think is important to be able to claim an off-site (...) (21 years ago, 30-Apr-03, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Elections and Membership in ldraw.org
|
|
(...) Maybe I'm missing something...but, wouldn't we only need to validate someone for an LDraw.org member account once? When they sign up, they provide a piece of info to verify their identity, and then they're allowed to create an account with a (...) (21 years ago, 30-Apr-03, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Elections and Membership in ldraw.org
|
|
Hi Todd - In lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, Todd Lehman writes: [...] (...) The systems you outlined above sound cool. It would be great if this could help with verifying people based on LUGNET member ID's. -Tim PS - are you by chance switching over to (...) (21 years ago, 30-Apr-03, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Elections and Membership in ldraw.org
|
|
Quoting "Kevin L. Clague" <kevin_clague@yahoo.com>: (...) I was only suggesting that the user provide their LUGNET membership number when voting, really. But I'm not nearly as concerned with Ballot stuffing as say, Dan is. :) J (21 years ago, 30-Apr-03, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Elections and Membership in ldraw.org
|
|
(...) I probably ought to reveal that I expect that I could easily get both a Danish and an Italian digital signature, which it would be non-trivial to show referred to the same person. Play well, Jacob -- Jacob's LEGO trains: (URL) (21 years ago, 30-Apr-03, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Moving LDraw.org permanently to Peeron?
|
|
(...) I'd be happy to mirror those files on the 3 web sites that I run : ) -JSM (21 years ago, 30-Apr-03, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Elections and Membership in ldraw.org
|
|
(...) That's another possibility, yes. The LUGNET server could generate a cryptographically signed string and e-mail this to a user, who could then cut and paste the string and submit it to the ldraw.org server, which would then decode the string (...) (21 years ago, 29-Apr-03, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Elections and Membership in ldraw.org
|
|
(...) I can think of two ways... I'm sure there are probably more. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- One way is for a member at LDraw.org to declare their LUGNET member id in their LDraw member record and to validate it by declaring their LDraw id in their (...) (21 years ago, 29-Apr-03, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Elections and Membership in ldraw.org
|
|
(...) Well it would certainly require support from Lugnet, but I don't think it would require validation of the password - just a confirmation email to the Lugnet registered email would be good enough I think? ROSCO (21 years ago, 29-Apr-03, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Elections and Membership in ldraw.org
|
|
(...) myself. (...) can (...) But that membership number would have to be validated with a password to know that it is any good. The numbers are easy to find. Validating the number against the password would require support from lugnet. Do you think (...) (21 years ago, 29-Apr-03, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Moving LDraw.org permanently to Peeron?
|
|
(...) Me too. (...) Nod, nod. (21 years ago, 29-Apr-03, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Elections and Membership in ldraw.org
|
|
(...) That's okay. I recognized that pretty quickly. Organizations need long term visions as well as short term. Hopefully the short term solution easily transitions into the long term stable solution. Otherwise, we may be seeing this same sort of (...) (21 years ago, 29-Apr-03, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Problem with account
|
|
Damien Guichard <damien.guichard@wanadoo.fr> schrieb im Newsbeitrag news:HE2p0D.JEC@lugnet.com... (...) Thanks for the reply, I wasn't sure if the PT is offline or my account is disabled. So some parts have to wait for submission. Bernd (21 years ago, 29-Apr-03, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Elections and Membership in ldraw.org
|
|
Hi Anders - (...) This verification discussion was based on the assertion in the thread that proving a unique identity to prevent vote spoofing was important. So, the suggestions made were proportioal to the concern expressed. That said, seeing that (...) (21 years ago, 29-Apr-03, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Elections and Membership in ldraw.org
|
|
"Tim Courtney" <tim@zacktron.com> skrev i meddelandet news:HE2B42.17Jp@lugnet.com... (...) the (...) Rules me out. (...) Rules me out. (...) the (...) No way. Rules me out. I think you are a bit paranoid about this, but maybe you have other (...) (21 years ago, 28-Apr-03, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Elections and Membership in ldraw.org
|
|
(...) Same here. (...) I agree here as well. Alternatively, the postcard idea could verify non-LUGNET members. Those opposed to ID as validation have generally accepted the postcard idea in its place. -Tim (21 years ago, 29-Apr-03, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Moving LDraw.org permanently to Peeron?
|
|
(...) just for the record, we're ok with this. (...) I think this is currently taken care of - the 3 files that accord for ~70% of the traffic are hosted on a different server that can handle the traffic. (...) I think that would be the case for any (...) (21 years ago, 29-Apr-03, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Moving LDraw.org permanently to Peeron?
|
|
(...) I'm positive towards the idea. Dan has been very helpful thus far, and Pair is a reliable ISP. -Tim (21 years ago, 29-Apr-03, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Moving LDraw.org permanently to Peeron?
|
|
What does people think about moving LDraw.org permanently to Peeron? I have discussed the problem a bit with Dan and Jennifer and they seem to be positive towards the idea, as long as we can distribute the heavy traffic (downloading the complete (...) (21 years ago, 29-Apr-03, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Elections and Membership in ldraw.org
|
|
(...) that would work with me, if everyone accepts the risk. (...) I wouldn't want to require LDraw members to be LUGNET members. Dan (21 years ago, 29-Apr-03, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Elections and Membership in ldraw.org
|
|
(...) Well, I would agree, I meant to mention I was thinking of that as a medium/long term solution. Sorry about that. (...) If you use the Passport (or really any other similar system, I just can't think of names off the top of my head) concept, (...) (21 years ago, 29-Apr-03, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Elections and Membership in ldraw.org
|
|
Quoting Larry Pieniazek <lpieniazek@mercator.com>: (...) I don't see a problem with email validation until it becomes a problem, myself. Alternatively, we could require a LUGNET membership number unless anyone disagrees with that idea, so far I've (...) (21 years ago, 29-Apr-03, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Who can vote for the LSC? (was: Re: Elections and Membership in ldraw.org)
|
|
(...) I pretty much agree with you. I'm not 100% sure if the latest draft proposal explicitly states this or not. My original thought was along these lines as well. An observation, if I may... I've spent quite some time talking about this LSC (...) (21 years ago, 29-Apr-03, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Elections and Membership in ldraw.org
|
|
(...) I think that the privileges would need to change as you move from site to site. Peeron and LUGNET have blanket memberships: every member at these sties pretty much has the same privileges (as far as I know, only admins and moderators have (...) (21 years ago, 29-Apr-03, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Elections and Membership in ldraw.org
|
|
(...) Yes. But we really want to avoid ballot stuffing, personally identifiable information is needed. So either we have to give up on preventing ballot stuffing, or on not exchanging personally identifiable information. For the brain-storm: * (...) (21 years ago, 29-Apr-03, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
