Apologies for the massive number of typos. I was angry when I read the response 
to my thoughtful messages. I tried my best to hold back. I didn’t even have the 
energy to check what I’d written before hitting send. 



> On Oct 24, 2019, at 7:37 PM, Paul Walsh <p...@metacert.com> wrote:
> 
> 
>> On Oct 24, 2019, at 6:53 PM, Peter Gutmann <pgut...@cs.auckland.ac.nz> wrote:
>> 
>> Paul Walsh via dev-security-policy <dev-security-policy@lists.mozilla.org> 
>> writes:
>> 
>>> we conducted the same research with 85,000 active users over a period of 
>>> 12 months
>> 
>> As I've already pointed out weeks ago when you first raised this, your
>> marketing department conducted a survey of EV marketing effectiveness.  
> 
> [PW] With respect Peter, you articulate your opinion doesn’t make it a matter 
> of fact. Read the article properly and you will see that it’s not from a 
> marketing department. It’s a small startup that wanted to conduct a social 
> experiment. 
> 
>> If
>> you have a refereed, peer-reviewed study published at a conference or in 
>> an academic journal, please reference it, not a marketing survey 
>> masquerading as a "study”.
> 
> Rubbish. We don’t need to publish at a conference or in an academic journal 
> for it to demonstrate a point. If *you* don’t want to trust it, that’s ok. I 
> don’t expect everyone to trust everything that is written.
> 
> As Homer Simpson said; “70% of all reports are made up”. 
> 
> Our work is not marketing - you obviously didn’t read the methodology and the 
> reasons or you wouldn’t make such silly comments. 
> 
>> 
>> A second suggestion, if you don't want to publish any research (by which I
>> mean real research, not rent-seeking CA marketing) supporting your position, 
> 
> Did you read any of the words I wrote? I’ve said more than once that I don’t 
> work for a CA - never have. You’re obviously a CA-hater and hate everything 
> that’s ever discussed about website identity. Haters are gonna hate. I 
> couldn’t be more impartial.
> 
> 
>> is that you fork Firefox - it is after all an open-source product - add 
>> whatever EV UI you like to it, and publish it as an alternative to Firefox.  
>> If your approach works as you claim, it'll be so obviously superior to 
>> Firefox that everyone will go with your fork rather than the original.
> 
> Another weird comment. Forking code and building products doesn’t mean people 
> will use it. I have nothing to prove to anyone. If all the browser vendors 
> did as I suggest it would mean there’s no need for our flagship product. So 
> how on earth could I be biased. My commentary or counter productive for my 
> shareholders and team. But I care about what’s in the best of industry. You 
> clearly don’t because you need to have the word “Google” or “Stanford” 
> stamped on a PDF. None of the authors of any of those documents come close to 
> the level of experience that my team and I have - including our industry 
> contributions. I was the first person to ever re-write Tim Berner’s Lee’s 
> vision of the “one web” when I co-founded the Mobile Web Initiative. I 
> shouldn’t have to throw these things around just to appease you. Do your 
> research if you actually care.
> 
>> 
>> For everyone else who feels this interminable debate has already gone on
>> far too long and I'm not helping it, yeah, sorry, I'd consigned the thread 
>> to the spam folder for awhile, had a brief look back, and saw this, which 
>> indicates it's literally gone nowhere in about a month.
> 
> Go play in your spam folder for a little longer because I’m done responding 
> to your insults. You didn’t question anything outside our intent which is to 
> question my integrity. I won’t accept that - it’s as insulting as it gets.
> 
>> 
>> I can see why Mozilla avoided this endless broken-record discussion, it's
>> not contributing anything but just going round and round in circles.
> 
> It’s going around in circles because you refuse to take the time and effort 
> to read what has been written. Instead, you assume we have ulterior motives. 
> As I’ve said, my motives are not necessarily in the best interest of my 
> company. 
> 
> - Paul
> 
>> 
>> Peter.
> 

_______________________________________________
dev-security-policy mailing list
dev-security-policy@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-security-policy

Reply via email to