Re: [atlarge-discuss] $1 verification.

[Sotiris Sotiropoulos <sotiris@hermesnetwork.com>]

James S. Tyre wrote:

> Thanks for your response, Sotiris,
>
> One reason why I did not initially self-identify as Karl's lawyer is 
> that I realize that puts me in somewhat of a unique situation, as I 
> assume most everyone here would accept Karl's word that I am who I say 
> I am, and my point never was intended to be about me.  Rather, it was 
> the broader point that if the analog option is available, why 
> foreclose it? 

James, I do not outright foreclose the 'analog option'.  I recognize 
that there is an expediency to that method.  However, you'll have to 
admit that it gets rather complicated to control and keep track of such 
a system as the membership base becomes increasingly larger.  The 
'analog' method leaves far too many possibilities for abuse beyond a 
given circle of 'acquaintance magnitudes'.  While you may be able to get 
Karl to vouch for you, not everyone can.  So, let's say that I vouch for 
someone I happen to meet once in my lifetime, does that act of 
vouchsafing a given individual confer 'notary' status to my protege in 
the organization, and inter se for any of his/her future proteges? Such 
that, anyone who is vouchsafed can indiscriminately vouchsafe whomsoever 
they please?  I assume you see the problem with that tack.

> I may not always agree with you (as I said, I've not posted here in 
> ages, but I've never unsubscribed), but if you were to vouch that 
> Alice is a real person whom you know, I would accept your word, you've 
> established your bona fides well enough even though we don't know each 
> other.  Same for Joop, for example, though certainly not for all who 
> post here.  There are reasons why I will not use PayPal, and the cost 
> and time of getting a digital certificate seem unnecessary if there 
> are other, perhaps even better, means of establishing that a person is 
> a real person - which is all I'm talking about here, not whether that 
> person is worthy of office.

Well James, I've just outlined my concerns with the 'analog' method 
above.  Please tell me how you would safeguard against my making a 
mistake and vouching for someone who isn't as ethical or honest as 
myself who would then be in a position to abuse the 'analog' method and 
thereby, our organization?

--Sotiris Sotiropoulos



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
For additional commands, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-help@lists.fitug.de