| 1 |
On Sat, Feb 2, 2019 at 12:55 AM desultory <desultory@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
> |
| 3 |
> On 02/01/19 08:25, Michał Górny wrote: |
| 4 |
> > On Thu, 2019-01-31 at 12:33 -0500, Rich Freeman wrote: |
| 5 |
> >> On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 8:56 AM Michał Górny <mgorny@g.o> wrote: |
| 6 |
> >> |
| 7 |
> >>> Verify the person's real name (at least for the user identifier |
| 8 |
> >>> used for copyright purposes). This is usually done through |
| 9 |
> >>> verifying an identification document with photograph. It is |
| 10 |
> >>> a good idea to ask for the document type earlier, and read on |
| 11 |
> >>> forgery protections used. |
| 12 |
> >> |
| 13 |
> >> "usually"? "identification document"? Does this mean that an |
| 14 |
> >> appropriate method of verification is entirely up to individual |
| 15 |
> >> discretion? If so that makes the process of getting every key signed |
| 16 |
> >> fairly trivial as long as two people have (in?)appropriately-rigorous |
| 17 |
> >> standards... |
| 18 |
> > |
| 19 |
> > I'm sorry, I keep forgetting that you can't rely on people in Gentoo |
| 20 |
> > being mature and you need to specify everything as 'MUST' and 'MUST |
| 21 |
> > NOT', or otherwise they are going to ignore the spirit of the policy |
| 22 |
> > and violate in the worst way permitted by bending the wording. |
| 23 |
> > |
| 24 |
> You started this thread with what distinctly appeared to be a plea to |
| 25 |
> avoid ad hominem attacks, just to turn around make make them yourself. |
| 26 |
> Do, kindly, stop it. |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
Neither of our comments were helpful here. I made a |
| 29 |
passive-aggressive post out of emotion and mgorny made a provoked |
| 30 |
passive-aggressive reply (which is why we shouldn't be communicating |
| 31 |
this way in the first place). In both cases the tone distracted from |
| 32 |
the gist of the points: |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
1. The standards for identification are somewhat subjective and will |
| 35 |
necessarily vary from individual to individual. You actually phrased |
| 36 |
this concern better in your reply, and perhaps I might have done the |
| 37 |
same if I had taken more time to compose myself better. |
| 38 |
2. Mgorny's point is that in practice well-intending identity |
| 39 |
verifiers are probably going to be good enough at getting the job |
| 40 |
done. I agree, though mainly because I don't think it is important |
| 41 |
that the job be done at all. |
| 42 |
|
| 43 |
-- |
| 44 |
Rich |
Archives