Subject: Policy-Discussion
List archive
- From: Dominik George <nik AT naturalnet.de>
- To: cacert-policy AT lists.cacert.org
- Subject: Re: PoJAM to DRAFT, votes pleaseI'
- Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2010 20:22:39 +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
- Openpgp: id=EFDFEB57; url=http://www.naturalnik.de/naturalnik-gpg.asc
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
>
> From a pedagogic pov you might be right here. However, from the legal
> pov (which counts here) everything else might become dificult.
>
> So somehow castrate the Junior/Minor but get on the safe legal site.
You are right. This is why I was only talking about internal numbers.
Nothing should be changed about the basic rights and duties of
Juniors, but giving their actions more weight won't change anything
from the legal point of view. Lawyers only care about what you do, not
how much of it you do. At least not in the first place.
- -nik
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iHMEARECADMFAktXV/8sGmh0dHA6Ly93d3cubmF0dXJhbG5pay5kZS9ncGctcG9s
aWN5LnR4dC5hc2MACgkQBk5Cpu/f61dZYQCfdy7gPO8+OY22YtnNIqbdQ0GZp9wA
oJ6yXZtFgNOmLQECZ61pKQjsC2nA
=bnuL
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Attachment:
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
- Re: PoJAM to DRAFT, votes please, (continued)
- Re: PoJAM to DRAFT, votes please, Ian G, 01/19/2010
- Re: PoJAM to DRAFT, votes please, Alexander Prinsier, 01/19/2010
- Re: PoJAM to DRAFT, votes please, Morten Gulbrandsen, 01/19/2010
- Re: PoJAM to DRAFT, votes pleaseaye!, Dominik George, 01/19/2010
- Re: PoJAM to DRAFT, votes please, martin.gummi AT cacert.org, 01/22/2010
- Re: PoJAM to DRAFT, votes pleaseaye!, Dominik George, 01/22/2010
- Re: PoJAM to DRAFT, votes pleaseI', Dominik George, 01/19/2010
- Re: PoJAM to DRAFT, votes pleaseI', Ian G, 01/19/2010
- Re: PoJAM to DRAFT, votes pleaseI', Dominik George, 01/19/2010
- Re: PoJAM to DRAFT, votes pleaseI', Mario Lipinski, 01/20/2010
- Re: PoJAM to DRAFT, votes pleaseI', Dominik George, 01/20/2010
- Re: PoJAM to DRAFT, votes pleaseI', Mario Lipinski, 01/20/2010
- Re: PoJAM to DRAFT, votes pleaseI', Dominik George, 01/19/2010
- Re: PoJAM to DRAFT, votes pleaseI', Ian G, 01/19/2010
- RE: PoJAM to DRAFT, votes please, ulrich, 01/19/2010
- Re: PoJAM to DRAFT, votes please, Ian G, 01/19/2010
- RE: PoJAM to DRAFT, votes please, ulrich, 01/19/2010
- Re: PoJAM to DRAFT, votes please, Brian McCullough, 01/19/2010
- RE: PoJAM to DRAFT, votes please, ulrich, 01/19/2010
- Re: PoJAM to DRAFT, votes please, Morten Gulbrandsen, 01/19/2010
- Re: PoJAM to DRAFT, votes please, Ian G, 01/19/2010
- Re: PoJAM to DRAFT, votes please, Tomáš Trnka, 01/19/2010
- Re: PoJAM to DRAFT, votes please, Ian G, 01/19/2010
- Re: PoJAM to DRAFT, votes please, Bernhard Fröhlich, 01/19/2010
- Re: PoJAM to DRAFT, votes please, Faramir, 01/19/2010
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.16.