Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

cacert-policy - Re: PoJAM to DRAFT, votes pleaseI'

Subject: Policy-Discussion

List archive

Re: PoJAM to DRAFT, votes pleaseI'


Chronological Thread 
  • From: Dominik George <nik AT naturalnet.de>
  • To: cacert-policy AT lists.cacert.org
  • Subject: Re: PoJAM to DRAFT, votes pleaseI'
  • Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2010 22:14:53 +0100
  • Authentication-results: lists.cacert.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.i= AT naturalnet.de; dkim-asp=none
  • Authentication-results: mx.b9d.de; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.i= AT naturalnet.de; dkim-adsp=pass

> So, whatever we do, we have to (technically, fully) get the parent's
> permission.  So we may as well just do that, regardless, and skip the
> whole "godfather" concept in the policy at least.

Not quite. The cocept I meant to implement is not about skipping parts from 
the current PoJAM WIP. The only thing from the document covered by the 
godfather concept atm is the amount of points a Minor can give. This is 
CAcert 
internal and does not depend on any contracts.

To do this, a parent's signature would not be enough. A parent cannot judge 
(in most cases) in how far a Junior is competent for CAcert internals.

The point is that there should be romm for discriminating Junior member 
(between, not against !!). From a pedagogic point of view, you simply cannot 
judge a person by her age alone.

-nik



Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.16.

Top of Page