Re: On the Construction of Pseudo-OTP

New Message Reply About this list Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

Jim Gillogly (jim@acm.org)
Wed, 13 Jan 1999 11:58:42 -0800


M-K Shen writes:
> Now Gillogly first criticized my terminology.
> I tried to agrue for keeping the old name. But this is quite common
> in scientific arguments. If Gillogly had written back, pointing
> out more clearly that the argument I made is wrong, I would have
> sooner done the renaming. But he didn't wrote.

Now just a cotton-pickin' minute. I'm not responsible for engaging
you or anyone else in extended arguments and discussions. You posted
to CodherPlunks on 8 Jan, and I replied the same day with what I thought
were cogent arguments about why the name you chose was misleading and
counterproductive. Others followed and nobody agreed with you. The
fact that I was the first in this forum to call your attention to the
problem does not obligate me to argue it at length with you.

I seldom read sci.crypt these days, but within a few days of your 8
Jan message I visited there again to find the same debate raging, and
that you had already gotten plenty of feedback on your choice of names.

Leave me out of your blame game!

-- 
	Jim Gillogly
	22 Afteryule S.R. 1999, 19:52
	12.19.5.15.7, 7 Manik 20 Kankin, First Lord of Night


New Message Reply About this list Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

 
All trademarks and copyrights are the property of their respective owners.

Other Directory Sites: SeekWonder | Directory Owners Forum

The following archive was created by hippie-mail 7.98617-22 on Sat Apr 10 1999 - 01:18:03