Policy-Discussion

["Ulrich Schroeter \(CAcert\)" <ulrich AT cacert.org>]

>  But: Something being against the AP IS a KO criterium. As the AP tells
 >  us that a Sub-Policy may not violate the AP.

Bullshit!!

AP 6   defines the procedure an topics for any enhancements to AP
Including exceptions.
The requirement for this is:
        => It must describe exceptions and potential areas of risk.

6.2. High Risk Applications   give some ideas of enhancements
And variations, but is not limited to it as the definitions
have to be set in subsidiary policies

Nucleus vs AP
===========

> To reach 100 Assurance Points, at least one Name of the Assured Member must 
> have been assured at least three times

After the Nucleus event, the assuree is assured with 100 and more Assurance 
points
By at least 12 assurers

> The maximum number of Assurance Points which can be allocated for an 
> Assurance under this policy and under any act under any Subsidiary Policy 
> (below) is 50 Assurance Points.

The initial assurance consists of 35 AP + temporarely 15 pts (35+15 = 50 max) 
where
15 temp AP will be removed later to switch the temporary process into the 
final
count



regards, uli    ;-)

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