On 5/30/2014 12:24 AM, Geoffrey Thorpe wrote:
...
The only way to to avoid any political overtones in such a situation (if
that really is your intention, because "doing the right thing" is not an
apolitical notion) is to blindly accept all comers or refuse all comers.
(Subject to the obvious outliers, ie. nothing criminal/illegal, no
conflict of interest, etc.) By erecting criteria beyond "no strings
attached" (which *is* a very explicit necessary condition), you are in
fact condemning yourself to the problem you are chastising us for.
I believe the additional criteria suggested would be "donor is not an
aspect of any government, military or intelligence organization,
anywhere". So for example DARPA, the USPS, the city of Munich and (a
few years ago) Northern Rock Bank would all be out of the question,
while IBM, Google, Samsung and Goldman Sachs would be OK.
Any intermediary organization would need to do more than just launder
the money. They would need to pool it with many other donations,
distribute to many other projects and give the donors no influence on
which projects benefit from their donations, thus obviously and
provably denying the donors even the appearance of a potential ability
to threaten to reward or punish a project via the purse strings.
Enjoy
Jakob
--
Jakob Bohm, CIO, Partner, WiseMo A/S. http://www.wisemo.com
Transformervej 29, 2730 Herlev, Denmark. Direct +45 31 13 16 10
This public discussion message is non-binding and may contain errors.
WiseMo - Remote Service Management for PCs, Phones and Embedded
______________________________________________________________________
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
User Support Mailing List openssl-users@openssl.org
Automated List Manager majord...@openssl.org
