Re: Requiring full name to join ~launchpad-beta-testers (was: Re: [Fwd: hggdh2 deactivated by matthew.revell])

[Neal McBurnett <neal@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 05:59:41PM +0000, Matthew East wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 1:21 PM, HggdH <hggdh2@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Mon, 2008-02-25 at 12:31 +0000, Matthew Revell wrote:
> > Matthew, this is exactly my point: if you trust someone to provide the
> > real name (but (can|elect) not to  check it), then there is no real need
> > to ask for a real name. I prefer to be honest also -- and this forced me
> > to withdraw.
> 
> I sympathise with your problem and agree with your position. However,
> I have the feeling from your email that you are eliding Canonical with
> Ubuntu a little too closely - I hope that the inability to participate
> in the Launchpad beta tester program has not affected your
> participation in Ubuntu.
> 
> Don't forget that while funded by the same company, Launchpad is a
> separate project to Ubuntu and does not have common decision making
> processes. If a Launchpad policy begins to affect Ubuntu as a project,
> then of course the two projects will get together and discuss those
> issues, but it seems to me that this particular issue only affects
> participation in the Launchpad project. It's not something that the
> Ubuntu project has a say in.

Yes, Launchad is independent and can set its own processes.  I think
it would get more support if they made more sense, and as I wrote
before, I think resolving this sort of problem with a federated
identity scheme would benefit all of us.  But hey, I think that about
a lot of stuff out there I don't agree with, and I'm pretty picky and
opinionated :-)

But this is also about the Fridge, which is part of Ubuntu, as Vid
pointed out in this same thread:

On Sat, Feb 23, 2008 at 11:20:15PM -0800, Vid Ayer wrote:
> I'd like to add my zero paise worth here because I believe a part of
> this discussion is indirectly related... it started when the fridge
> editors (I am one) were required to be a part of the LP-beta testers
> team and I offered to leave the team because I have been rejected from
> the team for not agreeing to the real name policy. One of the
> Canonical employees was nice enough to understand my points, take up
> the issue but was unable to change the real name policy, which I
> believe is the *best* way to lose technical contributors.

Where does this aspect of the problem stand?  Why do the fridge
editors need to be part of lp-beta?  If they do, why does this policy
affect them?

Neal McBurnett                 http://mcburnett.org/neal/