🚀 go-pugleaf

John Cooley (jcooley@world.std.com) wrote:
: I fully understand the emotional investment you & Gary must have in PGP
: because you're promoting it so much.  Statements like mine that hint at PGP
: not being appropriate for every post must appear that I'm totally against
: PGP, and, therefore, must have some evil hidden agenda that involved getting
: rid of PGP.  This isn't the case.

I haven't been promoting PGP - I haven't even been signing my messages!
I merely responded with a reason for what you saw, and a reason that 
I appreciate signed messages (even though I don't usually sign mine.)

As for investment - I don't have an emotional investment in PGP, but I 
would like to see it, or some other system, become fairly standard
while staying completely out of governmental control.  Proliferation
of PGP is one way to accomplish that, and so far it is the most
likely candidate.

I understand your dislike of the PGP signatures.  If I were logging
on at 2400 baud, I'd prefer not to read them too.  But, quite 
frankly, they provide more benefit than harm to my method of accounting.


-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Stamp out apathy...  aw, who cares.  Ambivalence is the TRUE opiate 
of the masses.

	-Fringe Ryder-