Re: [ga] Nomination Procedures/questions

[Weisberg <weisberg@texoma.net>]

Ben Edelman wrote:

> ...is some additional level of authentication perhaps in order for
> at least the members of the watchdog committee?

I wouldn't think so.  They will be chosen by people on whatever basis the
"electors" deem appropriate.  I have a hard time believing that cyphers will be
nominated (no less picked) over known quantities.


> I'm certainly open to alternative methods of authentication -- a "network of
> trust" (where, if I trust, say, Jonathan Zittrain and he says he knows Kent
> Crispin, then I accept Kent's legitimacy even if I've never met him) comes
> to mind, for example, and I'm sure there are numerous other suitable methods
> too.

That is not acceptable for a public list.  First, it is a biased filter.  And,
it misplaces the burden of proof.  You have to presume qualification and not
create any significant impediments to participation.  Exclusion must be based
upon clear criteria and sufficient evidence of disqualification.