Subject:
|
Re: Elections and Membership in ldraw.org
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw
|
Date:
|
Tue, 29 Apr 2003 14:36:25 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
2566 times
|
| |
|
|
Quoting Larry Pieniazek <lpieniazek@mercator.com>:
> 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.
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 heard no objections - if there are, we can
certainly rethink the idea.
Jennifer
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | 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 (...) (22 years ago, 29-Apr-03, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Elections and Membership in ldraw.org
|
| (...) 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 (...) (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
|
|
|
|
