Ben Bucksch wrote: > Michael Collette wrote: > >>Ben Bucksch wrote: >> >>>Michael, please comment on *either* the bug *or* in the newsgroup. >>>Otherwise, >>> >>> * you are repeating your arguments and others will have to repeat >>> their reponses >>> * the discussion is not archived in one place. >>> >>Fair enough. I mainly brought this to the newsgroup for discussion, then >>I >>found myself replying to stuff over in the bug. I'll stick to the bug >>report for discussion on this unless comments on the board here require a >>reply of some sort. If relevant, I'll copy such comments to the bug. >> > No, please do not. That's my point! If needed, we can post a summary in > the bug when the newsgroup discussion is over.
I'm sorry, now I'm honestly confused. I am really trying to not be argumenative on where we discuss this. From your previous E-Mail it stated "Either/Or", and based on the context I assumed you preferred to take this to the bug report. Are you now saying you want to discuss this here in the newsgroup? Either way is perfectly okay with me, I just need to know what you meant the first time around. If, as it now seems, you wish to keep this discussion to the newsgroup then I apologize for cluttering up the bug report. I saw the mail with your replies over there before I got to looking at the new postings to this group. That also lead me to believe you wanted to talk there as opposed to here. No matter where this gets discussed, I strongly feel that an open debate concerning this point is darn important. I know for myself this has brought about all kinds of security and data integrity issues that I hadn't thought were issues before now. I'm betting a lot of other folks haven't put this to the forefront of their thinking either. Later on, -- "Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend. Inside of a dog, it's too dark to read." - Groucho Marx
