[Foundation-l] Voting

[Anthony]

On Sun, Jun 1, 2008 at 7:33 PM, Kwan Ting Chan <ktc at ktchan.info> wrote:
> On Mon, 2008-06-02 at 00:15 +0100, David Gerard wrote:
>> 2008/6/1 Kwan Ting Chan <ktc at ktchan.info>:
>>
>> > But to think the set of people who deliberately sought out an unstable
>> > beta (Firefox 3) to run as their browser overlaps heavily with the set
>> > of people who wouldn't be able to figure out the settings.......
>>
>>
>> Firefox 3 will be released very soon.
>
> I am aware of that, having signed up at
> http://www.spreadfirefox.com/en-US/worldrecord/ :)
>
> Anyway, let's actually talk about what can practically be done about it
> for the current election.
>
> As SPI is a volunteer organisation who's helping assisting us for free,
> we certainly cannot ask them to paid for a certificate from a CA that's
> more widely accepted. So unless the foundation decides it want to fund
> such a purchase, there's not a lot that can be done.
>
Could always just use an unencrypted connection.  It's not like
there's any significant practical benefit to the encryption currently
implemented anyway.  (How many people have exclusively accessed their
local wiki under an encrypted connection and have checked the
fingerprint on the CA when installing it?)

Of course, making any change mid-election is dangerous.  Another
possibility if people think this is that big of a deal is to just void
the whole process before the results are made available.  Call this
the test run.  I suggested a test run to you last week on Danny's
blog, after saying "I think this method will be confusing, especially
with the large number of candidates. And if history is any guide,
there will probably be technical glitches which make things even more
confusing."