Policy-Discussion

[<ulrich AT cacert.org>]

Hi,

there is no question "if someone needs Nucleus"

A Nucleus is similar to an ATE event.
Needs some preparation, someone from
the "outside" who visits the desert
someone is defined as "senior-assurer"
with knowledge of the CAcert assurance procedures,
who did attend an ATE, so knows about
the CAcert advanced training program.
Did undergo an audit/co-audit
so we know the senior-assurer either way.

The 2nd measurement is the at least 4 eyes
principle, that makes the Nucleus program
special in contrast to the "old" Super-Assurance
program (someone could become experienced
assurer with one assurance (!) in
the old superassurance program).

And there is another high barrier ...
for the local community, to find 10
other new members and potential assurer candidates.

The Nucleus program is not a program to
cover all "special assurance programs"
as found under
https://wiki.cacert.org/Assurance/SpecialPrograms

Its a starter to make it possible under the
existing 50 assurance points max doctrine of
assurance policy, defined also for all
subpolicies, to perform better in seeding
deserts but still in compliance with AP
(at least 4 eyes principle)
and leaving a workable assurers base
after the Nucleus event that is able
to bring up fresh new candidates upto
assurer status.

To receive 50 assurance points,
the Nucleus event isn't intended for.
Therefor, we still have the TTP-assisted-assurance
program.


regards, uli   ;-)



-----Original Message-----
From: 
ruedin AT gmx.net
 
[mailto:ruedin AT gmx.net]
Sent: Saturday, March 23, 2013 2:34 PM
To: 
cacert-policy AT lists.cacert.org
Subject: Re: Re: Nucelus Assurance Program


Lambert wrote on Wed, 20 Mar 2013 21:39:22:

>Every auditor would like to have procedures set in stone, with every
>possible option documented and thoroughly tested.
>Every member of CAcert wants to have CAcert grow and increase in size,
>so tht everyone on this earth can benefit from it.

>Now here is the conflict: we cannot "seed" if we have everything fully
>documented and set in stone, because there will always be another

Well, what about a Nucelus Policy that gives the range (N +/-5).
If someone needs Nucleus and fulfils all the functions, ha can just go on.
If someone needs Nucleus and does not fulfils all the functions for 100%,
but
is still in the range, he has to submit to the Nucleus Council (f.ex.
three
officers) an exact programme: presentation, partner organisation, place,
invitations, participants, etc. to proove the , ....

May be this is an approach to have a policy, gaved in stone and on the
other
hand keep some flexibility, because as Lambert wrote, not every case can
be
anticipated.

Best regards,
Etienne

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature