Well, are there more people here who want a more strict crypto only list than those who want a more "generic" one? Would we set stricter rules here, or would there have to be a split? If there would be a split, are there enough of those who want a stricter list to start a new list and keep it going?
I would personally not mind a more strict list, but I would find it a bit boring if nothing but cryptography would be discussed. There's a lot of interesting consequences from cryptography, and if the only ones we could discuss here would be what the algorithms and protols themselves does, I personally don't think as many people would be interested in the discussions. But then I don't have any data on that, and I don't know how many or what kind of responses you got. 2013/1/26 Paul Hoffman <paul.hoff...@vpnc.org> > On Jan 25, 2013, at 4:11 PM, Natanael <natanae...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > If somebody wants there to be a pure cryptography mailing list and > separate more generic one (like this one currently is), I think that person > would have to try starting a more strict crypto mailing list, because I > don't think most people here would want the rules here to get stricter or > that they would want to switch to a different list that would be just like > this one is now. > > The off-list responses to my message would disagree with you. > > > We also don't want too many different lists. > > Some of "we" do. My question was to tease this out a bit. > > I'm happy to shut up about it if I'm in the minority, but the question > that started this thread was a perfect example of something that is about > security (actually, security operations), not cryptography, and yet gets > brought up on this list more and more. > > --Paul Hoffman
_______________________________________________ cryptography mailing list cryptography@randombit.net http://lists.randombit.net/mailman/listinfo/cryptography
