Re: Re: When did we lose control?

On Thu, 2004-10-21 at 13:33, David Brodbeck wrote:
> On Thu, 21 Oct 2004 11:57:31 -0700, James Couzens wrote
> > On Thu, 2004-10-21 at 11:47, Roger B.A. Klorese wrote:
> > > James Couzens wrote:
> > >
> > > > Why the hell are we even considering talking with them further. 
> > >
> > > Because a standard used by 2% of the population is no standard.
> > You miss my point.  They are _HINDERING_ development.  They have an
> > _AGENDA_ which it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out what
> > motivates that agenda.
> It's also an incorrect assertion, I think.
>
> Microsoft may have 98% of the MUA market.  I'm not sure that's true, but I'll
> admit the possibility.  I VERY much doubt, however, that 98% of the MTAs out
Well lets see.  From January forward would you agree that there has been
little to no progress, excluding Mark's recent publishing of an SPFv1
Draft which is what SHOULD HAVE REMAINED ON THE TABLE to begin with?  So
lets see what we got from having Microsoft involved.

- got our experimental draft prematurely pulled from the table
- sufficiently confuse the public
- far too much credit attributed to MS.
- now having to deal with our records potentially being hijacked
- little if any development has progressed, the forwarding hole surives
- increased and undue level of stress
- a severe loss of clear leadership
- the betray-o-meter long since ran out of juice to keep squealing

Just where is the benefit to having such a disruption around.  But your
argument they have no value.  By my argument they bring nothing but
negative pressure resulting in finger pointing and effectively little
getting done.

We all know Microsoft is scared of Linux.  Kind of ironic that it was
IBM who pretty much gave them their first big break, and well you can
see how Microsoft treats its non political friends (*cough* OS/2
*cough*)... Microsoft will continue to attempt to exercise control
wherever it stands to reap in the $$$ or control.

When was the last time you enjoyed being sold a PC that *HAD* to come
with a copy of Windows.  This is the type of strong arm tactics that
don't fly with me, nor with this community.  There are those in here
that for political reasons can not voice their concerns.  What a pity.

You can't have a unified effort if half the people in the room can't
even speak out against the presence of something that honestly doesn't
belong here.

> there are running Microsoft software.  Remember, SPF is implemented on MTAs,
> not MUAs.  For SPF's purposes it doesn't matter if your MUA is Outlook,
> Thunderbird, Webmail, or telnet to port 110.
Microsoft wants to implement it into MUA.  They want the market
SpamAssassin has only of course they want you to pay for it. 
Furthermore, their useless friends over at Verislime, do you want to
take a stab what they want.

Here is a pretty picture for everyone.

Super Cert 128bit SAF 
Verislimed Certificate   $499

Would it be a perfect little world if you had to purchase a certificate
in order to be taken seriously by major MTA's on the Internet (taken
seriously to mean: get your mail accepted).

All of this has happened before, can we please at least all sit in a
happy little circle and agree to disagree on whatever it is everyone is
really bickering about and agree to NOT allow the above to happen.

Cheers,

James


-- 
James Couzens,
Programmer
                        ^                            ( ( (      
      ((__))         __\|/__        __|+|__        '. ___ .'    
       (00)           (o o)          (0~0)        '  (> <) '    
---nn-(o__o)-nn---ooO--(_)--Ooo--ooO--(_)--Ooo---ooO--(_)--Ooo---
http://libspf.org -- ANSI C Sender Policy Framework library
http://libsrs.org -- ANSI C Sender Rewriting Scheme library
-----------------------------------------------------------------
PGP: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x7A7C7DCF

-------
Sender Policy Framework: http://spf.pobox.com/
Archives at http://archives.listbox.com/spf-discuss/current/
http://www.InboxEvent.com/?s=d --- Inbox Event Nov 17-19 in Atlanta features 
SPF and Sender ID.
To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your 
subscription, 
please go to 
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=spf-discuss(_at_)v2(_dot_)listbox(_dot_)com

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part