Re: [Cfrg] Requesting removal of CFRG co-chair

Tao Effect <contact@taoeffect.com> Tue, 24 December 2013 20:25 UTC

Return-Path: <contact@taoeffect.com>
X-Original-To: cfrg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: cfrg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 18FAC1AE07D for <cfrg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 24 Dec 2013 12:25:44 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.125
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.125 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01] autolearn=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 1UVwuszzjcTO for <cfrg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 24 Dec 2013 12:25:42 -0800 (PST)
Received: from homiemail-a3.g.dreamhost.com (caiajhbdcbbj.dreamhost.com [208.97.132.119]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE91B1AE026 for <cfrg@irtf.org>; Tue, 24 Dec 2013 12:25:42 -0800 (PST)
Received: from homiemail-a3.g.dreamhost.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by homiemail-a3.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DC0EE398001; Tue, 24 Dec 2013 12:25:38 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=taoeffect.com; h=subject :mime-version:content-type:from:in-reply-to:date:cc:message-id :references:to; s=taoeffect.com; bh=Ckt5Ms03EoYSBOxMKT7YDQj98es= ; b=ZZQgzHcvREq9qLGSt3zmz6R+xz5Cnk9DpUke0wXvfZUVZ8pRVeJAg7+IYwcG wx8QtCBOaVBA4UFLUvtbM8+iCjOFW1oWpI2XQUtWdRgyaIYvJVShI2zkBo4KaIjp wFoG41tJwi3BMMlGUwc6bfPW7BEkI1/GwKuVzDMDfmAZ7l4=
Received: from [192.168.2.3] (ip98-180-48-204.ga.at.cox.net [98.180.48.204]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: contact@taoeffect.com) by homiemail-a3.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 438B528406E; Tue, 24 Dec 2013 12:25:37 -0800 (PST)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.1 \(1827\))
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_91851578-FEAC-4BB3-B707-314BDCDEBBFD"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha512
From: Tao Effect <contact@taoeffect.com>
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
In-Reply-To: <e4054b534e308e3c17c22ccf987d3edc.squirrel@www.trepanning.net>
Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2013 15:25:32 -0500
Message-Id: <E7E97A5B-455F-4ABD-A182-DF6DC38F3429@taoeffect.com>
References: <CAGZ8ZG2f9QHX40RcB8aajWvEfG0Gh_uewu2Rq7bQGHYNx6cOmw@mail.gmail.com> <52B91820.9090706@cisco.com> <CAGZ8ZG02+o=Qm0gUQiVF9H_=wfn+wQt8ahY1ntLHNsELXbvtVg@mail.gmail.com> <AA79A33E-D6B9-4693-A670-B4458011B394@cisco.com> <CA+cU71mTCVHAe2a46USJihr9ihPVw_vQTu0xk-mpRp41La88Xg@mail.gmail.com> <e4054b534e308e3c17c22ccf987d3edc.squirrel@www.trepanning.net>
To: Dan Harkins <dharkins@lounge.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1827)
Cc: Trevor Perrin <trevp@trevp.net>, "cfrg@irtf.org" <cfrg@irtf.org>, Brian Weis <bew@cisco.com>, David McGrew <mcgrew@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: [Cfrg] Requesting removal of CFRG co-chair
X-BeenThere: cfrg@irtf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Crypto Forum Research Group <cfrg.irtf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://www.irtf.org/mailman/options/cfrg>, <mailto:cfrg-request@irtf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.irtf.org/mail-archive/web/cfrg/>
List-Post: <mailto:cfrg@irtf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:cfrg-request@irtf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/cfrg>, <mailto:cfrg-request@irtf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2013 20:25:44 -0000

On Dec 24, 2013, at 3:09 PM, Dan Harkins <dharkins@lounge.org>; wrote:

>  The lack of opportunity to raise objections is due to the fact that he
> (and the others who recently subscribed to CFRG because they follow him
> on twitter and heeded his call to join the crusade) were not involved at
> the time.

Sorry, I don't quite follow your logic.

Are you saying that the appointment was made without a request for
feedback because some people were not subscribed to this list?

> Realize too that had Kevin's employer not given these people the
> opportunity to strike their fashionable pose there would be no discussion
> of IRTF process or what the CFRG's place in the world is.

The issues that have been raised are nothing but "fashionable poses"?

How do you figure that?

> So this really
> isn't about IRTF process or the CFRG. It all comes back to the conspiracy
> theory, and the guilt-by-association, and the fallacious ad hominem
> attacks.

What is the "conspiracy theory"?

What are the "fallacious ad hominem attacks"?

Thanks,
Greg

--
Please do not email me anything that you are not comfortable also sharing with the NSA.