Proposal talk:Pseudonymous PGP

From Strategic Planning


Some proposals will have massive impact on end-users, including non-editors. Some will have minimal impact. What will be the impact of this proposal on our end-users? -- Philippe 00:00, 10 September 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Impact on non-editors would be negligible
Impact for editors would be negligible unless users opt-in. The possibilities for pseudonymous but authenticated communication would enhance users' confidence in sharing private information. As well, pseudonymous but secure communication would enhance the community's confidence in how private information is handled (the perception) in addition to enhancing how private information is handled (the reality).
This also opens possibilities for authentication beyond the wikis, allowing community members to remain pseudonymous but have authenticated access to secondary and tertiary services.
Mike.lifeguard | @meta 01:44, 11 September 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Would help for client side scripting projects

Having stronger identity would help in server side scripting projects (embedding Java, JavaScript or Flash). These have a problem that malicious scripts may be submitted (vandalism). This is something that person with known true ID unlikely will be doing. AudriusA 19:17, 18 October 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]