Re: Answering questions and defamation (was: RE: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Fri, 30 May 2003, Dean Anderson wrote:

> Pete sent me private mail on Wednesday
[..]
> Today Pete sent me private mail saying one can't trust headers besides
> your own. I sent Pete private mail back, pointing out the invalidity of
> his assertion. Obviously, you can trust other headers, and you can
> identify forged headers.  Pete and John's assertion otherwise is wrong.

if you have to identify the forged headers first, you can't start by
trusting them. duh.

Some would argue that "trust, but verify" fundamentally isn't trust.

I would argue that this is the sort of grad-school semantics traps
that adults with decent communication skills don't fall into during
discussion.

> It all seems to be a diversion from the question of relevance.

Oh, indeed. One might ask the relevance to this list.

You don't understand the meaning of the word "private", do you?
And you have awfully poor communication skills.

L.

This list is noise. I'm leaving.

<http://www.ee.surrey.ac.uk/Personal/L.Wood/><L.Wood@ee.surrey.ac.uk>


[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]