John Clizbe wrote: > Christopher J. Walters wrote: >> I know quite enough about the field without your snide and foolish remarks. >> I >> refuse to engage in a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent. > > Statement one: I'll ignore as other readers may make their own opinions > as to the quality of knowledge demonstrated. > > All too often we see folks too overly invested in a creation to accept > objective criticism of the idea. > > statement two: Rob seems actually quite well-armed to discuss these > topics, wit capacity being left unjudged. But then, I know about his PhD > study concentration and work in the security field from our mutual > Enigmail work: Black Hat 2005 on SQL injection; DEF CON 2006 on > electronic voting security; CodeCon 2006 and OSCON 2006 on non-security > topics.
Statement one, and all of its children, I shall ignore, since they are only ignorance masked as arrogance and "superior knowledge and intellect". You don't know me well enough to judge either, so do this list and yourself a favor and stay out of it. It reeks of Ad Hominum, without quite getting there. I am sure others will. Statement two, two words: Straw man. Statement three: Faulty use of (assumed) Authority, Post Hoc. Therefore, ignored. _______________________________________________ Gnupg-users mailing list Gnupg-users@gnupg.org http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
