-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Folks,
I have been reading this thread for far too long
Point and counter-point; Feignt and thrust; Whine and counter-whine
I just recently exited the NM que. I had to jump through all the hoops.
And you know what? I agreed with every one
On Thu, Aug 03, 2000 at 04:47:31PM +, Dale Scheetz wrote:
> On Thu, 3 Aug 2000, Anand Kumria wrote:
> > Why do you continue to confuse the issue by bringing in the onerous task
> > furphy? It is all about trust.
> Well, I agree that I trust a keysigner, and that trust allows me to accept
> the
On 03-Aug-2000 Matthew Vernon wrote:
> Dale Scheetz writes:
>
> > I just can't understand the reluctance to satisfy this requirement except
> > that it is viewed by some as being too hard. I cannot, for the life of me,
>
> You've not been reading my emails then. I don't want random people
> ha
On Thu, 03 Aug 2000, Matthew Vernon wrote:
> Dale Scheetz writes:
>
> > I just can't understand the reluctance to satisfy this requirement except
> > that it is viewed by some as being too hard. I cannot, for the life of me,
>
> You've not been reading my emails then. I don't want random peop
Dale Scheetz writes:
> I just can't understand the reluctance to satisfy this requirement except
> that it is viewed by some as being too hard. I cannot, for the life of me,
You've not been reading my emails then. I don't want random people
having a copy of my passport digitised (worse still,
Anand Kumria wrote:
>
> On Wed, Aug 02, 2000 at 07:35:40PM +, Dale Scheetz wrote:
> > On Wed, 2 Aug 2000, Matthew Vernon wrote:
> >
> > > Dale Scheetz writes:
> > >
> > > > ...Scanning a passport seems to be a reasonable skill to
> > > > require of incoming members. Isn't it?
> > >
> > > No.
On Thu, 3 Aug 2000, Anand Kumria wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 02, 2000 at 07:35:40PM +, Dale Scheetz wrote:
> > On Wed, 2 Aug 2000, Matthew Vernon wrote:
> >
> > > Dale Scheetz writes:
> > >
> > > > It comes down to: Can you do "normal" things that may be required by the
> > > > task at hand? Sca
Hi.
In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
on "Thu, 3 Aug 2000 13:55:43 +1000",
Anand Kumria <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Extrapolations:
>
> 1. the new-maintainer process does not trust existing developers;
> having your key signed by an existing developer counts for nothing
"counts for nothing" seems t
Dale Scheetz writes:
> On Wed, 2 Aug 2000, Matthew Vernon wrote:
> > No. Why should being a debian developer require you to be able to get
> > hold of a scanner?
>
> Why should we require them to have access to a computer?
Oh come on, be reasonable. That's a non sequitur, and you know
it. T
Dale wrote:
> Matthew Vernon wrote:
> > Therefore, what does it matter that I can't remember the face of the
> > person whose key I signed six months ago? I am still happy that I saw
> > good ID, and that if I get mail signed/encrypted with that key that it
> > comes from that person.
> >
On Wed, Aug 02, 2000 at 07:35:40PM +, Dale Scheetz wrote:
> This just doesn't seem to be the onerous task that several have made it
> out to be. It's just another requirement for becoming a member. Why not
> just obliterate all the requirements, and make signing up sufficient to
> membership?
11 matches
Mail list logo
