On 19/11/14 09:54, Nan wrote: > First, "charlatan" and "snake oil" imply deceit.
They often do, don't they? I doubt that is what is meant, though. If I look in the Oxford online dictionary: Definition of charlatan in English: noun A person falsely claiming to have a special knowledge or skill Definition of snake oil in English: noun [mass noun] informal , chiefly North American 1 A substance with no real medicinal value sold as a remedy for all diseases 1.1 A product, policy, etc. of little real worth or value that is promoted as the solution to a problem These all seem to definitely be how I interpreted Rob's messages. I personally never read any implication of wilfull deceit, but I'm famous for missing nastiness sometimes.[1] I can completely understand you read an implication of wilfull deceit. I doubt it is actually there, though. Does this help in defusing? > We'll have to disagree on whether we should ignore clear evidence about DSA > because academics haven't published yet. I understand this is very important > to you because of your NIST association. I hope you've already defused by now, because this looks like lighting the fuse. Hopefully by now it's just a bit of fizzing wire, kept well away from the bomb. Peter. [1] Okay, in light of a recent event: sometimes I see nastiness that's not there! ;) -- 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
