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
Mok-Kong Shen (mok-kong.shen@stud.uni-muenchen.de)
Thu, 14 Jan 1999 10:43:42 +0100
Jim Gillogly wrote:
>
>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>
> 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!
My sincere apology. I was in NO sense blaming you. Maybe I formulated
inappropriately. But there was not the slightest intention. I was
listing the historical events, trying to explain why it took a bit
longer for me to react than some others have expected. I think that
I am not overemphysizing, if I say that of all the messages I got
from the list in the point in question, yours have been ones among
the most influential on grounds of their information content.
As to the discussion in sci.crypt I like to remark that the vehement
opposition by one person in matter of terminolgy appeared of
less convincing force to me because of his simultaneously
expressed initial conviction that a hardware device can attain the
'absolute' perfection of an ideal OTP, which I consider to be false
(he finally appears to have agreed on that).
M. K. Shen
The following archive was created by hippie-mail 7.98617-22 on Sat Apr 10 1999 - 01:18:03