On Fri, Sep 24, 2004 at 11:06:30AM +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
>
> On 23-09-2004 22:58, Richard A. Hecker wrote:
> |
> | I see this secrecy-lock as a byproduct of d-private and not the main
> | goal. As you acknowledge above, laziness is the issue. Your solution
> | requires lazy people to ju
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 23-09-2004 22:58, Richard A. Hecker wrote:
| On Fri, Sep 24, 2004 at 02:55:41AM +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
|
|>On 23-09-2004 19:30, Richard A. Hecker wrote:
|>
|
| ..
|
|>| It is wrong for a person to equate d-private == secret_content.
|>
On Fri, Sep 24, 2004 at 02:55:41AM +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
>
> On 23-09-2004 19:30, Richard A. Hecker wrote:
>
..
> | It is wrong for a person to equate d-private == secret_content.
>
> Somewhat true. The problem is that emails not explicitly declared
> differently must be kept secret
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 23-09-2004 19:30, Richard A. Hecker wrote:
| On Thu, Sep 23, 2004 at 08:53:39PM +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
|
|>Thank you for not abusing our secret mailinglist for irrelevant stuff
|>like pointing fingers at (cute?) attempts to follow our Socia
On Thu, Sep 23, 2004 at 08:53:39PM +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
>
> Thank you for not abusing our secret mailinglist for irrelevant stuff
> like pointing fingers at (cute?) attempts to follow our Social Contract.
>
> Feel free to quote my parts of this email in public!
>
> I see nothing secret
--- Jonas Smedegaard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> A wildly interesting discussion is taking place at
> debian-project
> currently, with the subject "How to solve problem X
> least secretly".
>
> Come on everybody and show the world that you care
> about when our secret
> mailinglist is appropriat
6 matches
Mail list logo
