Kirk, This is not helpful or productive. Should I take your response to mean that you do not wish to engage with or answer the question, which was hopefully both simple and clear, which was simply trying to understand why, given the problems, you would propose anonymity? Understanding your reasoning, and the things you considered in proposing it, is entirely based in good faith, and I hope you can extend the same courtesies.
On Sun, Jun 11, 2017 at 5:32 PM, Kirk Hall <kirk.h...@entrustdatacard.com> wrote: > Actually, Ryan – you go first. Why did you object? > > > > *From:* Ryan Sleevi [mailto:sle...@google.com] > *Sent:* Sunday, June 11, 2017 12:37 PM > *To:* Kirk Hall <kirk.h...@entrustdatacard.com> > *Cc:* CA/Browser Forum Public Discussion List <public@cabforum.org> > *Subject:* Re: [EXTERNAL]Re: [cabfpub] Send us you list of current > problems with the Network Security Guidelines > > > > Hi Kirk, > > > > While I realize your reply was seeking for more clarification, I think > it's important to note that you didn't actually engage with the question I > asked. I'm hoping to ask again - could you go into detail why this would be > beneficial for discussion? > > > > Thanks > > > > On Sat, Jun 10, 2017 at 12:54 AM, Kirk Hall <kirk.h...@entrustdatacard.com> > wrote: > > Why do you think it’s detrimental to discussion – I don’t follow your > logic? > > > > *From:* Ryan Sleevi [mailto:sle...@google.com] > *Sent:* Friday, June 9, 2017 4:49 PM > *To:* CA/Browser Forum Public Discussion List <public@cabforum.org> > *Cc:* Kirk Hall <kirk.h...@entrustdatacard.com> > *Subject:* [EXTERNAL]Re: [cabfpub] Send us you list of current problems > with the Network Security Guidelines > > > > > > > > On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 4:34 PM, Kirk Hall via Public <public@cabforum.org> > wrote: > > Bruce and I will combine all suggestions received and report *anonymously* > to the whole group for a discussion in Berlin. > > > > That seems pretty detrimental to discussion - that is, the anonymous > aspect - unless we're talking about specific audit failures. > > > > Could you go into detail why this would be beneficial for discussion? > > >
_______________________________________________ Public mailing list Public@cabforum.org https://cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/public
