> > Uli : BTW, I'm also in favor of a limited MetaCard license. That is,
> > the version of MC that the UFP gets for this project shouldn't be
> > applicable for commercial projects.
>
Scott: I'm not sure we have any really strong need to do this.
Certainly it
> would be a lot more work for us to impose this restriction.
Adrian: Okay, if you're happy without this restriction then I won't
argue.
> Scott: I'm still in favor of some social control here rather than trying some
> new technical approach. As I suggested to Alain sometime ago, one way
> to do this would be to require that some fraction of the OpenCard
> group membership (say 25% or 50%) approve you before you get your
> MetaCard license. This would encourage participation (so that people
> know who you are and so would vote for you) and to some extent
> distribute the responsibility for approval to enough people that any
> posers would get weeded out before they get a license and any abusers
> would likely be discovered by at least one of the people who approved
> them. While this kind of oligarchy failed miserably in the case of
> the Soviet Union, it might be just the ticket here ;-)
Adrian: I like this idea of having a certain percent of the group
approve of you getting a license. That means that you don't have
to say "I will do this" and be held to it, but we can still keep the
risk of people abusing the generousity of MetaCard to an absolute
minimum. This system's got my vote.
