Thanks, John, that means a lot to me.  I welcome peer review, why else would I 
write?

I hope that my own response did not get out of line and appoligize if I 
offended you.
 

On 2004.01.29 20:12 John Hebert wrote:
> --- will hill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Tin foil hats, get out more?  Did I fall into some
> > kind of Slashdot troll hole?  We don't need to be
> > like this to each other.
> 
> You are right, I was wrong.
> 
> Last night I played waay too much Half-Life into the
> wee hours burning off steam from fighting MyDoom on a
> MS-Exchange box all day; my testosterone level was
> high, and wife just left on an extended business trip.
> 
> I meant to be civil and reasonable in my reply to your
> email explaining your hypothesis that Microsoft is
> behind the MyDoom worm based on your observation that
> Microsoft could be shown statistically to be keeping a
> list of email addresses of Linux zealots as potential
> targets but using its own Microsoft Outlook as a virus
> delivery vector.
> 
> But somewhere along the way I lost it, and stepped
> over the line. I am sorry and I should not have done
> that. If I got personal, I didn't mean to do so. My
> only intent was to try to get you to consider what you
> were saying from a critical and logical perspective.
> 
> I do want to say that part of the scientific process
> does involve peer review. I think of everyone on the
> mailing list as peers and I consider this to be an
> open forum for discussion. Therefore, we must take
> responsibility for what we say here. I just did.
> 
> I'm sorry and I apologize.
> 
> 
> =====
> John Hebert
> 'cat /dev/random | perl'
> 
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free web site building tool. Try it!
> http://webhosting.yahoo.com/ps/sb/
> 
> _______________________________________________
> General mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://brlug.net/mailman/listinfo/general_brlug.net
> 

Reply via email to