Public SourceMage Discussion List

["Mathieu L." <lejatorn AT smgl.homelinux.net>]

Hi all,

I was indeed quite surprised we were not using gpg signing for the votes
so far. I'm all for it now that someone is finally bringing it up. 
Maybe we shall vote to decide wether to use it or not? ;)

Cheers,
Mathieu.

On Fri, May 13, 2005 at 09:45:44AM -0500, David Kowis wrote:
> Quoting Flavien Bridault <f.bridault AT fra.net>:
> 
> >Hi people,
> >
> >My proposal would be to keep the anonymous vote during the vote period,
> >and then publish the list in the same time as the vote result. This way,
> >there will be no possible dispute. Obviously, this will assume that
> >anyone will know who voted for who after the vote, but this is the only
> >way I see. Anyway, did we really need to keep such secrets ? Are we not
> >enough responsible to assume our own vote ?
> The point of requiring that the votes were anonymous is so that others 
> were not
> influenced by someones vote. I understand your concern and I find it 
> alarming
> that people would resort to forging votes, or even consider forging votes.
> 
> Perhaps another alternative would be to require votes to be gpg signed and
> verified that way? I don't think requiring a GPG signature for the email 
> that
> the vote's on is necessarily a bad thing. It's not hard to acquire a gpg 
> key.
> Too bad we don't have the channel for the signing anymore. Perhaps we 
> could add
> it to the website?
> 
> Back to the topic, I think you've got a very valid point and it will 
> not affect
> the current voting process, nor will disclosing the results at the end 
> affect
> the votes of people during the election. It might displease some people, 
> "Why
> did you vote for him, I thought you were going to vote for me !?!" But that
> happens. I'm in favor of the disclosure after the votes have ended. I think
> it's a good thing, and I don't think it will hurt, since before we used 
> to tell
> the list anyway.
> 
> If the disclosure thing proves to be unliked, then I'd reccommend that 
> we go to
> gpg signing of the votes.
> perhaps the process should go:
> 1. submit a key to the PL that you'll use to sign your vote with
> 2. sign (encrypt if desired) the vote email you're sending when voting 
> occurs
> 
> Now that I think about it, I like the gpg signature thingy better than the
> disclosure :)
> 
> Some things to think about during this especially lively voting session :)
> 
> (a little campainging :) )
> Vote for me for ISO team lead :D
> 
> An ISO Team Lead Candidate,
> David Kowis
> 
> -- 
> One login to rule them all, one login to find them. One login to bring 
> them all,
> and in the web bind them.
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.
> 



> _______________________________________________
> SM-Discuss mailing list
> SM-Discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/sm-discuss


-- 
We are Microsoft.  Linux is irrelevant.
Openness is futile.  Prepare to be assimilated.
--