Vernon was responsible for the initial flame wars on ASRG. Any idea that was
not his would be attacked in vitriolic terms. Vernon repeatedly attacked my
proposals based on authentication type approaches including the original
Vixie scheme.
Anyone who replied to Venon's ad-hominems or raised a technical issue with
his own proposals was likely to get booted off the list by the then chair.
Vernon also had a habit of reporting email messages he simply disagreed with
as spam to his DCC system, sending a report back to the sender. This type of
behavior was certain to make the list deteriorate into flames.
I do not rate Vernon's skills highly because he is incapable of listening to
let alone answering technical issues raised with his system - in particular
the clear risk of censorship it poses.
Hence I would not recommend this approach.
-----Original Message-----
From: wayne [mailto:wayne(_at_)midwestcs(_dot_)com]
Sent: Friday, December 19, 2003 3:46 PM
To: spf-discuss(_at_)v2(_dot_)listbox(_dot_)com
Subject: Re: [spf-discuss] vernon schryver
In <20031219200159(_dot_)GA3797(_at_)dumbo(_dot_)pobox(_dot_)com> Meng Weng
Wong
<mengwong(_at_)dumbo(_dot_)pobox(_dot_)com> writes:
On Fri, Dec 19, 2003 at 01:49:16PM -0600, wayne wrote:
|
| (see http://www.rhyolite.com/anti-spam/you-might-be.html )
|
You Might Be An Anti-Anti-Spam Kook If:
* proposals not presented on ASRG are "developed behind
closed doors"
Actually, I don't think Vernon has a heck of a lot of confidence that
design-by-committee (such as most of IETF, ASRG, ISO, ICANN, etc.)
will come to much good.
Of all the anti-spam systems I saw proposed on ASRG in the first month
or so, the only ones that I hadn't heard of before were
designated-sender systems that used DNSBL type forms (a la DMP and
early SPF), and temp-failing/graylisting. Everything else (including
RMX) were tired rehashes of systems that would never work.
Vernon has implemented and deployed a graylisting add-on to DCC and
did so in a matter of a week or two after he started. "Code talks, BS
walks."
Vernon has dismissed designated sender systems, but not because they
haven't come from ASRG.
Vernon is almost always worth listening to. He is not, however,
someone you should just blindly accept everything he says.
As Morely Dotes said about Vernon:
"It's his technical expertise I admire. And his social skills I
appreciate, because they make me look so much better by
contrast. ;-)"
I think we would benefit greatly if Vernon gave a solid once-over on
the SPF spec and code, even if that meant getting a health does of his
"social skills" also.
-wayne
-------
Sender Permitted From: http://spf.pobox.com/
Archives at http://archives.listbox.com/spf-discuss/current/
Latest draft at http://spf.pobox.com/draft-mengwong-spf-02.9.4.txt
To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily
deactivate your subscription,
please go to
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname(_at_)©#«Mo\¯HÝÜîU;±¤Ö¤Íµø?¡
-------
Sender Permitted From: http://spf.pobox.com/
Archives at http://archives.listbox.com/spf-discuss/current/
Latest draft at http://spf.pobox.com/draft-mengwong-spf-02.9.4.txt
To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your
subscription,
please go to
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname(_at_)©#«Mo\¯HÝÜîU;±¤Ö¤Íµø?¡