Subject:
|
Re: Elections and Membership in ldraw.org
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw
|
Date:
|
Tue, 29 Apr 2003 04:08:22 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
2474 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, Dan Boger writes:
> On Mon, Apr 28, 2003 at 07:20:24PM +0000, Larry Pieniazek wrote:
> > Dan, you stated that just taking people's word that they were unique wasn't
> > sufficient. What is the comfort level you think we need to get to? And what
> > schemes for getting there pass your own internal test of "secure enough for
> > this but not too intrusive"? I'd like to see you put some proposals on the
> > table.
>
> I was under the impression that we were allowed to comment without
> having a replacement idea. I'm not actually saying we even NEED all
> this verification - just that we need to think about it.
>
> In my mind, I'd like to see something that requires more than 2 minutes
> to spoof. The postcard idea floated could work, but it's not nearly
> fast enough for instant gratification. Then again, if membership is
> only required for voting, it might not really be a big deal.
I'm confused. I find your conflicting statements very conflicting.
I think it's time to call the question. What level of validation do you (and
Jenn, for that matter, since she voiced a negative with no positive offered)
think we need? What scheme do you propose we use? Can you get something
concrete on the table to replace (or, alternatively, you could speak up in
support of) the straw man.
We need to move forward.
This isn't on the critical path yet, but it will be soon, I suspect, or else
we will yet again not make forward progress, and sputter out in a mire of
indecision. If the 4+1 is to achieve it's goal of supplanting itself, this
needs to get resolved.
Show me that community discussion can resolve this better than a small group
of people going off and making decisions about it would. Show me.
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | 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 (...) (22 years ago, 29-Apr-03, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Elections and Membership in ldraw.org
|
| (...) my only problem, is since I know what "reasonable care" is, it's really not much. (...) I'm not sure I believe in "privacy provisions" - since it's in lawyer talk, it's usual not possible for the average user to actually know what they say - I (...) (22 years ago, 29-Apr-03, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
74 Messages in This Thread:
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
