|
Grex > Coop11 > #255: Should we change Grex's ID policy? |  |
|
| Author |
Message |
| 25 new of 140 responses total. |
other
|
|
response 30 of 140:
| 
Apr 20 03:41 UTC 2001 |
Just because he said it doesn't mean it is true. He has a pointed
interest in our abandonment of our current policy, and has said many
things to that end. You're welcome to believe everything you read. I
choose not to.
|
jp2
|
|
response 31 of 140:
|
Apr 20 03:46 UTC 2001 |
This response has been erased.
|
eeyore
|
|
response 32 of 140:
|
Apr 20 03:56 UTC 2001 |
Naw, we'll leave the standing around like an asshole to you.
If you noticed in the minutes, Anne will be doing some research on this for
us, to look into the current laws. If it comes up that something in our
prcedures are illegal, then of course, we will fix it. In the meantime,
things stand as they are, unchanged.
I know for a fact, now, that it is not illegal to photocopy a drivers license
in Missouri. I made some phone calls to some reputable sources. All things
considered, I have a hard time believing that anything in our ID policy is
illegal.
|
carson
|
|
response 33 of 140:
|
Apr 20 14:11 UTC 2001 |
(I also failed to find such law, as I indicated last week, and provided
my source of reference, unlike others.) :^)
|
dpc
|
|
response 34 of 140:
|
Apr 20 18:25 UTC 2001 |
I think usgov is a pseudo. 8-)
|
other
|
|
response 35 of 140:
|
Apr 20 18:49 UTC 2001 |
A pseudo what? ;-)
|
jp2
|
|
response 36 of 140:
|
Oct 23 21:29 UTC 2001 |
This response has been erased.
|
aruba
|
|
response 37 of 140:
|
Oct 23 23:01 UTC 2001 |
I always give two reasons when anyone asks why Grex requires ID from its
members:
1. While we are very comfortable allowing anonymous users access to Grex,
we are not comfortable unleashing them on the rest of the Internet. It
would be irresponsible of the Grex administration to allow people we can't
identify to telnet through Grex to other systems, so we require ID from
everyone we allow to do that.
2. Cyberspace Communications is required by the state of Michigan to
maintain an up-to-date list of members. Implied in this requirement is
that we make sure no two memberships are held by the same person. So we
require ID to connect accounts with real people and make sure no one has
the ability to vote twice in Grex elections.
Anne (mooncat) volunteered to look into the exact legal requirements that
govern our membership list. Last I heard she was waiting to hear back
from someone.
|
jp2
|
|
response 38 of 140:
|
Oct 23 23:54 UTC 2001 |
This response has been erased.
|
mdw
|
|
response 39 of 140:
|
Oct 24 06:59 UTC 2001 |
Did you find anything stating a 10 year old list scribbled on the back
of a napkin and naming 3 dead people, a cat, and a parrot (since
deceased) is acceptable?
|
gull
|
|
response 40 of 140:
|
Oct 24 13:58 UTC 2001 |
Question: When submitting ID for a paypal payment, does the copy of
the ID have to be sent via postal mail, or is an emailed image file
sufficient? (Yeah, yeah, I know. But I've got a balance sitting in my
PayPal account, and it'd be quicker to spend it on something than to
wait for PayPal to cut me a check.)
|
other
|
|
response 41 of 140:
|
Oct 24 14:00 UTC 2001 |
Grex has chosen a policy which is the ONLY responsible interpretation of the
law considering the nature of our organization and the services it provides.
|
pthomas
|
|
response 42 of 140:
|
Oct 24 14:47 UTC 2001 |
"the law." Which law? Provide a citation please.
I've looked through the bits of MCL dealing with membership in nonprofit
corporations and it says nothing about maintaining an "up-to-date list."
The state isn't interested in how you keep track of your membership.
|
jp2
|
|
response 43 of 140:
|
Oct 24 14:53 UTC 2001 |
This response has been erased.
|
aruba
|
|
response 44 of 140:
|
Oct 24 15:20 UTC 2001 |
Re #40: An emailed image file is OK. See
/---------------------------------------\
| http://www.cyberspace.org/memfaq.html |
\---------------------------------------/
The upshot being, you should send the ID to me at mconger@umich.edu, because
Grex won't accept large image files. You may still get a message from Grex
saying it bounced, because mail to there forwards over here, though a copy
is always saved over there. So if you get a bounce message from Grex even
though you send the file to umich, send me a separate message telling me to
go get the file from umich. Got that? :)
|
aruba
|
|
response 45 of 140:
|
Oct 24 16:48 UTC 2001 |
Re #42, 43: OK, how about:
http://www.michiganlegislature.org/law/GetObject.asp?objName=450-2413
It refers to having a list of eligible voters available for a
particular meeting, but since we allow voting online it seems natural
to conclude that we are required to have such a list available whenever
we vote on anything.
I am not a lawyer, so a lawyer may please correct me if I'm wrong, but
it seems to me that inherent in all laws about membership corporations
will be the idea that one person can only hold one membership. That's
the connection between the law and why we require ID from members.
Because in a bookkeeping sense, we grant memberships to logins, not to
actual people. In a legal sense, though, we should be granting
memberships to people. So we require ID to make sure the relationship
between logins and people is one-to-one.
|
jp2
|
|
response 46 of 140:
|
Oct 24 17:03 UTC 2001 |
This response has been erased.
|
pthomas
|
|
response 47 of 140:
|
Oct 24 17:50 UTC 2001 |
Even if someone buys 50 memberships under separate pseudonyms, he still
only has one. The other 49 are invalid, whether or not anyone knows
about it or not. That is what the law refers to, it seems to me. It says
nothing about the company investigating whether all memberships were
purchased in good faith.
Now certainly Grex can choose not to trust its users, and force them to
mail proof of identification to purchase a membership. I wasn't aware that
that was part of the hallowed Cyberspace Communications "philosophy."
|
remmers
|
|
response 48 of 140:
|
Oct 24 23:21 UTC 2001 |
I think that the ID requirement is reasonable and prudent, regardless
of the legalities. That is, discovery that the law doesn't hold us
to our current standards wouldn't affect my view that we're doing the
right thing.
|
jp2
|
|
response 49 of 140:
|
Oct 24 23:30 UTC 2001 |
This response has been erased.
|
remmers
|
|
response 50 of 140:
|
Oct 25 00:41 UTC 2001 |
I can live with that. :)
|
orinoco
|
|
response 51 of 140:
|
Oct 25 03:05 UTC 2001 |
I'm with remmers. Saying "The Law makes us do it" is missing the point. We
have a policy that we think makes sense, and we're willing to be accomodating
within reason. If we run across a good reason to change it, we should change
it, but I don't think we've run across a good reason.
|
jp2
|
|
response 52 of 140:
|
Oct 25 03:06 UTC 2001 |
This response has been erased.
|
md
|
|
response 53 of 140:
|
Oct 25 12:37 UTC 2001 |
Jamie's already assured us that you can't photocopy anything in
Maryland anyway, so I guess that's that.
|
davel
|
|
response 54 of 140:
|
Oct 25 12:44 UTC 2001 |
I also think the policy makes sense, regardless of the law's requirements.
But I'd also think that the requirement (in the place Mark cited) that
"The officer or agent having charge of the shareholder or
membership records of a corporation shall make and certify a complete
list of the shareholders or members entitled to vote at a
shareholders' or members' meeting or any adjournment thereof."
requires something of the sort. He's not only supposed to make a list, but
to certify it; surely that requires *some* effort to determine that those
members are eligible members?
I'm no lawyer, either, FWIW.
|