Since Dan chose to reply to my mail in public, and left the "in reply to" tag untouched, thereby identifying me as the anonymous poster he strived so hard to keep anonymous, here's my message to him.
From: Russ[SMTP:Russ .
Sent: Sunday, April 07, 1996 12:28 PM
To: 'Dan Stromberg'
Subject: RE: BoS: DNS Spoofing and Java
Dan, this is a private email, and I would appreciate it if you could keep it private.
In your first two posts on the topic you tried to indicate that it had already been discussed ad nausium on www-security, then you go and post a summary that was obviously slanted towards your arguments. If this wasn't a taunt then I don't know what is. It seemed nothing more than an attempt to bring an argument into the Firewalls list which began somewhere else, presumably with the hopes that you could succeed here where you had previously failed. Very childish...
Then you enter into a public flamefest with EKR, including posting a message, which was sent to you privately, to the Firewalls list. Again, the only purpose of this was not to discuss technology, but to air your grievances yet again. Very childish...
Then, after you have ignored further technical discussion on the topic, you have the gaul to ask if any of us have changed our views based on your input. Since you did not see fit to respond to the technical questions posed about your missives, how do you think you could have effected us? Danny Boulet's message of the 4th was a direct response to your edict, but you never responded publicly. Or Steve Gibbons' message? Was your flame war with EKR so important that the topic became irrelevant to you?
IMHO, this is not how intelligent discussion or enlightenment occurs. Your view may be wrong, then again, it may be right. The only way you, or anyone else, will know for sure is if you engage in useful discussion about the topic. Your first posts were perfectly in line with that idea, but then you digressed...
I strongly suggest that you consider the tactics which you've displayed in this foray and decide, for yourself, whether or not you succeeded in whatever your original, presumably selfless, motives were. I, for one, don't think so.