> That's a totally non-sequitur argument... That's because it's not an argument. It's showing you that you're arguing from one particular viewpoint, and the other viewpoint is every bit as valid. They are just as correct to question your existence as you are to question theirs. And they are also just as correct to ask for an interface that meets their needs as you are to ask for one that meets yours.
> I'm not saying that either group is unimportant. In fact I would > argue that people who are actually using cryptography for real, > meaningful purposes are far more important than the dilettantes like > us. If you're a dilettante, why should I care about your opinion? > I have said repeatedly now that I'm not concerned with what experts > can or cannot do. I think the new defaults are bad on several levels, > and will lead to bad outcomes. And we've said several times: we've heard you, but we disagree, so we're going forward with the current design. You may want to consider the possibility that the louder you shout at us how we're dooming email adoption, the less inclined we are to take you seriously. If bad outcomes happen, so what? By your own admission the adoption of email crypto can't really get much worse. There's a kind of liberating freedom in being completely screwed: it gives you enormous freedom to do different things -- especially things that people tell you will never work and will have bad outcomes. The new interface is what it is. And if we get feedback from users saying they hate it and it makes their lives difficult, we'll fix it. It's remarkably simple that way. :)
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ enigmail-users mailing list [email protected] To unsubscribe or make changes to your subscription click here: https://admin.hostpoint.ch/mailman/listinfo/enigmail-users_enigmail.net
