Home Messages Index
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index

In Defense of Roy

In article <wk788js7wv75$.cyulo0xxm1od.dlg@xxxxxxxxxx>,
 Hans Lister <stymeeee@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Sorry Roy Schestowitz, but nothing at all was made up.
> Your email complete with PGP signature proves exactly what you
> are all about and all the attempts at deflection won't help you
> out.

I'm no fan of Roy, but he deserves a fair shake (even though he usually 
isn't fair to the people he attacks).

The email in the blog post proves *nothing* at this time. The author of 
the blog entry says the signature checks, but have you verified it?

I am confident that you have not, because I *have* tried to verify it, 
and was unable to. To check a signature, you need to message. The 
conversion of the message to HTML for posting has mangled enough of it 
in ways that are not easily reversed.

Until the blog author makes the message available by a mechanism that 
doesn't mangle it (downloadable file, perhaps, or uuencode it before 
putting it in the blog) so that any third party can check to see if 
Roy's signature matches, the claims against Roy are completely 
unsubstantiated.

Roy: if you indeed are innocent of the accusation against you, your best 
defense is that alleged email from you. Just insist that the blog author 
publish the email unmangled. If he does so, and the signature does not 
check, you will have caught him in a massive lie, and destroyed his 
credibility. Don't get distracted arguing the points of his blog 
entry--focus exclusively on his claim that he has an email that says 
what the posted email says, with a valid signature from you.

-- 
--Tim Smith

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index