On 16/09/14 20:41, Robert J. Hansen wrote: >> Ouch, that's really selective quoting you're doing. > > No, I'm using the same verbiage I did before. Quoting myself:
No no no no, let me put that in context for you. >>> If you can find half a dozen *real users* who are >>> being *really impacted* by this, I'd love to hear about them. But so >>> far, all the discussion is so hypothetical that it's hard for me to take >>> it seriously. >> [...] >> You can't argue that these aren't real users. You can't argue it's not a >> real impact. You can only argue that the impact isn't that big. But that >> is a long shot from "so hypothetical it's hard to take seriously". I >> don't understand where that came from. > Sure I can. You weren't really impacted by it. You had easy > mitigations available to you. I was exactly asserting that you can only argue about the extent of the impact, not that there exists an impact. But you snipped that so it became: >> You can't argue that these aren't real users. You can't argue it's not a >> real impact. > > Sure I can. You weren't really impacted by it. You had easy > mitigations available to you. Which suddenly makes it look like I made a false statement, when in fact I was simply stating that something that has an arguably small impact is a long shot from something that is "so hypothetical it's hard to take seriously". Thereby discrediting my view by association to a false statement. I really hate it when you don't argue based on merits but seemingly just to sway people to your point. I always wonder if maybe your point isn't strong enough by itself. There, I've said it. Deal with it. In fact, thank me for it. Peter. -- I use the GNU Privacy Guard (GnuPG) in combination with Enigmail. You can send me encrypted mail if you want some privacy. My key is available at <http://digitalbrains.com/2012/openpgp-key-peter> _______________________________________________ Gnupg-users mailing list Gnupg-users@gnupg.org http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
