Re: Denied vote and the definition of a DD
Scripsit Francois Gurin <matrix@debian.org>
>> ======================================================================
>> a) Present me with a picture ID signed by the DAM, or the DPL,
>> or the whole NM team, stating that the person named, and
>> whose picture is being signed, is indeed a DD.
> i request that a) be dated and only valid for a predetermined period
> of time.
OpenPGP signatures are always dated.
Assuming that the project secretary does not go stark raving mad, he
would only accept signatures made so recently that the voter could not
reasonably just have his new key added to the keyring instead.
> i would further like clarification if the picture in a) can be signed by any
> member of the NM team or indeed must be signed by all members of the NM team.
"The whole NM team" is hard to misunderstand, isn't it?
>> c) tell me, personally, what your vote is during the voting
>> period. Be prepared to do the same with an auditor is the
>> vote is ever audited.
> will c) be restricted to official audits of the vote or can any interested
> party running an independant count request the credentials according to the
> process outlined above?
Read §5.2.5 of the Consitution, second half.
> in the future, will we see ftpmasters employing this process as proof of DD
> status when uploading packages?
If we do, it will consitute irrefutable proof that all the ftpmaster
team has entirely too much time on their hands and that all who claim
otherwise belong to the Cabal.
Seriously, instead of asking a bunch of high project officials to sign
your ID, you could just have them sponsor your package. That is
quicker and easier on everybody.
> if so, i would like to see the credentials in a) printed directly on
> the media to prevent contamination to the archives.
Huh?
--
Henning Makholm "Punctuation, is? fun!"
Reply to: