On 06/04/2012 09:56 PM, David Benfell wrote: > This isn't seeming consistent to me. How do you reconcile...
Quite easily, actually: >> I've only ever said that the keyservers have always been guided by >> a "no loss of information, ever" policy. My position is: "Keyservers have always been guided by a 'no loss of information, ever' policy." >> And I've also outright said that we need a way to change this >> policy, because otherwise we're one [insert legal challenge] away >> from all of us having to shut down permanently or else fear >> criminal charges for [criminal offense or EU data privacy >> directive]. My position is: "We need a way to change this." Really, what's so inconsistent about saying "this is the way things are, and I believe it is in need of change?" It's true, there's quite a bit of nuance in my position: it's served up with a soupçon of "we should make sure we understand exactly why the original design was this way," a garnish of "I'd rather have the less-than-optimal current behavior than a poorly-thought-out 'solution'," and a dollop of "it's quite likely that a solution for the particular imperatives faced by U.S. keyservers will not be the same as a solution for the particular imperatives faced by E.U. keyservers," but as I said, that's just nuance. _______________________________________________ Sks-devel mailing list Sks-devel@nongnu.org https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/sks-devel
