[aur-general] TU application from graysky - voting period

[Eric Waller]

I have tried to stay out of this in that I am not a TU and my input carries
no official weight.  I am, however, a moderator on the forums and a
professional with significant experience in the field of trust, so I hope
you give me some creed.

I find your argument to have no basis in fact and to be borderline libel.
I have, throughout my career, had positions of trust with my government
backed by sundry clearances.  At present, I am in the credit card
processing business, which has its only level of trust.  I have watched
Graysky for months.  I have been an practicing engineer for more than 25
years, and have no reason to question his ability; If you do, so be it.
His technical ability notwithstanding, I find your calling his
trustworthiness in to question to be inappropriate and suspect it to be a
red herring.

I assert you should provide evidence for your lack of trust in him, or you
should apologize publicly..

Eric Waller




On Sun, Mar 24, 2013 at 1:53 PM, Daniel Micay <danielmicay at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Sun, Mar 24, 2013 at 4:29 PM, Rashif Ray Rahman <schiv at archlinux.org>
> wrote:
> > The current (majority) voting system is fine -- making decisions based
> > on consensus agreement is not a suitable method for the TU selection
> > process (it would needlessly raise the bar for something that is not a
> > matter of public safety).
> >
>
> Trusting someone with the ability to push binary packages out to every
> Arch user seems like something that should have a pretty high bar.
> It's not just trust that they won't do anything malicious, it's trust
> that they'll look after their key and won't allow a situation where
> someone else would have access. They need to be able to work with the
> rest of the team and take responsibility for any mistakes they make.
>