<rhino> after you settle this problem, i have 3 questions about the disownment document

<rhino> first, the easy one

<rhino> under "Jurisdiction of the Community"

<rhino> first sentence, first half

<rhino> "If somebody asserts that they are a member of this community, then the opinion and will of the community is binding upon that member, and the will of the community governs that persons acceptance as a member"

<rhino> the first half of this, what does it mean

<rhino> "then the opinion and will of the community is binding upon that member"

<rhino> maybe it needs rephrasing?

<Hermit> It means that you can assert membership of the community, but the community has also to accept you as a member. It also means that adoption of the goals and norms of the community is bound up with mutual assertion of membership.

<rhino> so, it was supposed to be associated only with acceptance?

<Hermit> rhino: If you say you are a member of x and then act against x, then no matter what you say you are not a member of x.

<Hermit> Secondly, asserting membership of an organization that accepts principles of governance, means that you accept the principles of governance.

<rhino> the second is a religiopsychological one

<rhino> re the supporting cases

<rhino> coming from an environment where i had never to do with churches, the supporting cases seem to me a little loony

<rhino> how would they seem to someone who got out from a religious church?

<rhino> just curious

<Flux> I think the term is 'fellowship'. Right?

<Hermit> rhino: The community just applied the rules above. <Hermit> "friends" refers to the accepted practice of "The Society of Friends"

<localroger> One assumes that the principles of governance are clearly enumerated somewhere. <Hermit> No.

<rhino> does the society of friends sound as an acceptable reference to post? To most?

<Hermit> The "rules" were the force of the community as expressed in the community "Meetings"

<localroger> Hermit, however nicely one phrases the fact that we are not getting out the pitchforks and torches, it's still mob rule.

<Hermit> rhino: I suggested their methods largely because of all the churches I have studied they seemed the most compatible with the CoV.

<localroger> Just a very polite mob.

<Flux> I disagree localroger. Right a polite mob.

<Hermit> localroger: Not at all. Aside from Flux's very valid comment, there was also a structure of elected elders whose role was to ensure continuity and adherence to the principles that that community felt were important.

<rhino> so, you think the document reads ok from that aspect. I mean, it won't weird anyone out

<Hermit> I think so.

<rhino> i was asking because i had never any contact with this kind of religious organizations and i couldn't know the effect

<localroger> Actually going on I think the procedure Hermit outlines is as sound as any I've ever seen put into practice.

<Hermit> We have well defined "sins", "virtues" and "goals" and actions can be evaluated by reasonable people in the light of that structure.

<Hermit> The key is having "reasonable people" at the helm.

<Hermit> And the reputation system, and current leadership which hopefully will be self-perpetuating should ensure that the people applying the system are reasonable (or we have failed anyway).

<rhino> Third Question: Those disownment precedents, had a power over the person because they deprived him/her of something essential in real life. Here, it may work somehow only for the really "hooked"

<rhino> this seems to me qualitatively different

<localroger> I think the key to that rhino is that there is no "shunning." The disowned party is not denied any services or associations except direct participation in Church activities.

<Hermit> rhino: It makes no difference to us. If a person is asked nicely a bunch of times and won't cooperate with the community, then they can read and follow what is said and done by the community, but cannot contribute to it. So what they do from then forward does not, directly, affect the community.

<localroger> This raises a question with me, though, which pertains to how the BBS and reputation system works. Will it scale? How would it work in a situation like kuro5hin where you have a hundred hangers-on who are happy to open four new accounts every month as their old ones are sanctioned?

<Hermit> localroger, two answers.

<Hermit> The first is that there is a cost. Reputation has to be "bought" either through people knowing you (and putting their reputation on the line) or through contribution. The second is undoubtedly more significant.

<Hermit> Somebody who contributes to purchase recognition is "hooked" as Rhino put it.

<Flux> purchase recognition?

<rhino> true, the way to be hooked is to offer

<Hermit> The second is somewhat more technical, in that we see moving to a single sign-on using certificates to assert identity.

<Hermit> This will make it much more difficult to "spam identity"

<Flux> Hermit, maybe a baysian system with IP lookup?

<Flux> - to detect it and shut them down after by someone with admin priv.

<Hermit> Flux: I see one possibility being the use of the US Postal Service certificate of identity in the US, and other Virians speaking for you outside.

<localroger> I'd say the major flaw at K5 is that just anybody can walk up and start voting and posting. Starting newcomers at mediocre reputation does raise the bar. I can't say the system would work in vitro, but I can't see a reason not to try it, either.

<Hermit> Also very difficult to hide identity when making meaningful posts, and almost impossible to obtain reputation without it.

<localroger> I think attempts to securely ID posters are doomed to failure, as any such system can be snarked.

<Hermit> localroger - not the US system, you have to go to a post office with a piece of photoid to obtain one.

<Flux> actually I had a system I was talking to Lucifer about months back

<localroger> Hermit: Right, the ID is through meaningful posts necessary to build reputation. Almost impossible to hide who you are for very long if you are actually posting meaningful content .

<Flux> using hard drive serial number encryption

<Hermit> Less good.

<Hermit> I use many workstations without harddrives. And even post via my cellphone from time to time.

<rhino> heh, maybe a virian hasp :P

<Flux> heh

<localroger> Also any system that depends on sending an ID code can be hacked/spoofed.

<Flux> Hermit, weirdo :D

<Hermit> localroger, not easy with the USPS id

<outlawpoet> i surf from PDA also

<Flux> yes, it could be spoofed, it would b hard, I think

<Hermit> It is deeply cryptographically signed and uses SSH for validation.

<localroger> What is hard to do to day, will be easy to do tomorrow. Isn't that like part of the lead-up to this big S-word thingy we're all looking forward to?

<Hermit> Not easy to spoof without active collusion within the USPS

<Hermit> Certainly not worth the effort spoofing it simply to sign onto a system.

<Flux> maybe...

<Hermit> localroger, remember we are simply talking authentication here.

<localroger> Well I don't know how the USPS thing works, but the weak link in any scheme like that isn't the encryption, it's the transport layer for the keys.

<Flux> it depends on the hormones the brain produces, for a certain breed of hacker its a challenge

<localroger> Flux: Right.

<Hermit> local - the USPS system uses a cryptographically signed certificate traceable back to the USPS. They use a 2k encryption key.

<localroger> It's using a hammer on a breed of cockroach some of whom might just get pissed off enough to discover liquid nitrogen.

<Hermit> When you obtain a new certificate, the previous one is revoked.

<localroger> Hermit, does this mean you actually have to contact USPS to validate each time there is a signon?

<Flux> what about looking at the IP addresses?

<Hermit> Yes.

<Flux> with a baysian system

<Hermit> Flux, forget it.

<Hermit> This is a simple third party authentication.

<Flux> Hermit, how about a interogration with random questions?

<Flux> that is a personality profile test

<Hermit> It isn't needed

<Flux> well the US postal thing wont work for everyone

<Flux> will it??

<localroger> All of this seems like a ridiculous amount of effort for an organization whose membership roster is, unless I am seriously mistaken, in the high two digits.

<Hermit> localroger 1600+

<localroger> Lotta lurkers in there, then.

<hkhenson> typically ten to one lurkers on usenet

<hkhenson> maybe 20 to 1

<hkhenson> for some newsgroups.

<hkhenson> I think it is possible to make cov into a very effective cult

<hkhenson> not sure it would be a good idea . . . . .

<hkhenson> but there are some interesting control mechanism being developed

<hkhenson> I really have to spend more time looking into this

<localroger> Well I don't understand this "lurking" thing much better than I understand the "trolling" thing; if I hang around a place on-line I like to participate, and I like to feel I helped out a bit.

<hkhenson> after all, you need a cult to fight other cults.

<hkhenson> that's a sure thing.

<localroger> HKH: We had to destroy the village to save it?

<hkhenson> local, you make the same error many do.

<hkhenson> thinking that other are like you.

<Hermit> localroger agreed. But the last few years have seen an awful lot of new submitters thrashed by our resident troll.

<hkhenson> very few are like you if you are anything like I am. :-)

<Hermit> After watching the first couple of ambushes, others learn not too.

<hkhenson> joe?

<Kalgone> and all that whining about his promiscuous mother...

<hkhenson> from what I have seen other places . . . .

<hkhenson> you are actually lucky. there are worse.

<hkhenson> wade for example on the memetics list.

<hkhenson> took me about half a dozen to a dozen posting and I just didn't respond at all to him any more

<Hermit> Oh sheesh. Wade was here. He got himself dissected and his head placed on his tummy...

Last edited on Friday, August 29, 2003 4:24:52 pm.