Re: On delegation, publicity and tags (was: Re: [Demexp-dev] Re: New version of security requirements)

[felix . henry]

Hi,

> 
> >   I do not agree.  Delegate vote means vote that you agree to see
> > published.  I do not see the point in delegate votes for which you
> > prevent people from delegating: they would count in any case for
> > nothing!  If you do not want people to know your vote through
> > delegation then just don't vote as delegate (and break the _virtual_
> > link you want to have between your private secrete vote and your
> > [unusable] delegate vote).
> 
> I agree with fred here.

Yes, we've discussed this thoroughly today with Fred and I agree with what
you both say.
> 
> To solve this issue on the client, I'm thinking of a list of keywords
> (i.e. tags) in the client, list initially empty, that tells questions on
> which delegate and personal votes are synchronized. If a question tag
> does not belong to this list, no delegate vote is made. To answer to
> your initial question, Félix, if somebody delegates a vote to you on a
> keyword not chosen in your delegation keyword list in your client,
> you'll never vote as a delegate on it and so it is as if you would have
> refused the delegation. What do you think of it?
> 

Yes, this sounds good to me (I'm very cooperative tonight:-). 

Cheers,

  Felix