Debian Administrator's Handbook

[Lars Noodén]

The Debian Administrator's Handbook is available for sale and download:

http://debian-handbook.info/

Regards,
/Lars


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4FABC0C...@gmail.com

[Arif Hossain]

On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 7:21 PM, Lars Noodén <lars....@gmail.com> wrote:
> The Debian Administrator's Handbook is available for sale and download:
>
>        http://debian-handbook.info/
>
> Regards,
> /Lars
>
>

Wonderful piece of work .


--
-aft

--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org

Archive: http://lists.debian.org/CAGuaRCvvwo9C663QWGN2Kuuw...@mail.gmail.com

[Alberto Fuentes]

On 10/05/12 15:21, Lars Noodén wrote:
> The Debian Administrator's Handbook is available for sale and FREE download:

FTFY :)

btw, awesome piece of work. Thanks to everyone that made thit possible!

greets!

--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org

Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4FABC323...@qindel.com

[John A. Sullivan III]

On Thu, 2012-05-10 at 16:21 +0300, Lars Noodén wrote:
> The Debian Administrator's Handbook is available for sale and download:
>
> http://debian-handbook.info/
>
> Regards,
> /Lars
>
>

What a great contribution. Thank you.
I went to the
http://debian-handbook.info/browse/stable/sect.quality-of-service.html
page simply because it was an area where I had done a lot of work lately
to develop a dynamic traffic shaper to conform to percentile billing. I
assume the section is so short because it is such a fabulously complex
part of Linux. I figured most of the information was under the given
link:
http://www.linux-france.org/prj/inetdoc/guides/lartc/lartc.html
but that sends me to
http://www.inetdoc.net/guides/lartc/lartc.html
and generates a 404 Not Found error.
Thanks again - John

--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org

Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1336657655.8...@denise.theartistscloset.com

[Alberto Fuentes]

On 10/05/12 15:47, John A. Sullivan III wrote:
> On Thu, 2012-05-10 at 16:21 +0300, Lars Noodén wrote:
>> The Debian Administrator's Handbook is available for sale and download:
>>
>> http://debian-handbook.info/
>>
>> Regards,
>> /Lars
>>
>>
> What a great contribution. Thank you.
> I went to the
> http://debian-handbook.info/browse/stable/sect.quality-of-service.html
> page simply because it was an area where I had done a lot of work lately
> to develop a dynamic traffic shaper to conform to percentile billing. I
> assume the section is so short because it is such a fabulously complex
> part of Linux. I figured most of the information was under the given
> link:
> http://www.linux-france.org/prj/inetdoc/guides/lartc/lartc.html
> but that sends me to
> http://www.inetdoc.net/guides/lartc/lartc.html
> and generates a 404 Not Found error.
> Thanks again - John
>
>

You seem you are looking for this:

Linux Advanced Routing & Traffic Control HOWTO
http://lartc.org/howto/

btw, what is this dynamic traffic shapper you are talking about? ive
been after something like that for a long time in linux.. Something
similar to what netlimiter is able to do in windows world....

The only thing ive been able to find similar is trickle and nethogs but
they certainly have limitations

greets!
aL

--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org

Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4FABC9B4...@qindel.com

[Phil Dobbin]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 10/05/12 14:21, Lars Noodén wrote:

> The Debian Administrator's Handbook is available for sale and download:
>
> http://debian-handbook.info/

Excellent. I've been looking forward to this for a long time. Off to
Lulu to get a dead tree... :-)

Cheers,

Phil...

- --
currently (ab)using
Debian Squeeze, Fedora Verne, OS X Snow Leopard, Ubuntu Oneiric


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJPq9BjAAoJECPmYW6gk8JjkDEH/jSqtV/qsCqPpDzcQCYmwyYn
EkWyE+SDb9+U4pTWzfmp/4Zdtm6YGQOhnuz7p5I9+5VVnhB8s+61S4o+GpPFNGmh
O6LJyJgrSh5AXZB5+zkZ13o5TLYpJfVQda+Cbzvr/ASdwnRvFtCzB08cS+y2vC+n
w9FDtizph3A8v+hDL8F5MCLXwHjnDXA7B11zl0dW1d2DjHcydWHghNVB9N5dhjaQ
VGv1GwZKl/TKQRPeU/pisIYEpduG648/W+8VhRqIgpKrHlHap3PUkmmMTDi/U+ZN
qjn2h3iG5+W5LEhA5PDkPd44l18m6YanQ2TW/npKTKAV1Mbxg3m+4lIUV6i6Ekk=
=pqOL
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org

Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4FABD06D...@gmail.com

[Tony van der Hoff]

On 10/05/12 15:27, Phil Dobbin wrote:
> Cheers,
>
> Phil...

So, this message was signed.

Having recently installed enigmail, to see what all the fuss is about
in the other thread. I find I'm at a loss to understand how to
interpret this.
-------------------------------------------------
OpenPGP Security Info

Unverified signature

gpg command line and output:
/usr/bin/gpg
gpg: Signature made Thu 10 May 2012 15:27:47 BST using RSA key ID A093C263
gpg: Can't check signature: public key not found
-------------------------------------------------

Am I expected to go to some keyserver to find the sender's public key?
How, where, why?

Maybe I've not set up Enigmail correctly?

Alternatively, should I just ignore the signature, in which case why
is the sender polluting the list with useless crap?


--
Tony van der Hoff | mailto:to...@vanderhoff.org
Buckinghamshire, England |

--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org

Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4FABDB44...@vanderhoff.org

[Phil Dobbin]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 10/05/12 16:14, Tony van der Hoff wrote:

> So, this message was signed.
>
> Having recently installed enigmail, to see what all the fuss is about
> in the other thread. I find I'm at a loss to understand how to
> interpret this.
> -------------------------------------------------
> OpenPGP Security Info
>
> Unverified signature
>
> gpg command line and output:
> /usr/bin/gpg
> gpg: Signature made Thu 10 May 2012 15:27:47 BST using RSA key ID A093C263
> gpg: Can't check signature: public key not found
> -------------------------------------------------
>
> Am I expected to go to some keyserver to find the sender's public key?
> How, where, why?
>
> Maybe I've not set up Enigmail correctly?
>
> Alternatively, should I just ignore the signature, in which case why
> is the sender polluting the list with useless crap?

You have an option to import my key under your PGP menu should you wish
to do so . If you have installed Enigmail then go ahead & do it.

However, if you have no wish to use PGP & see it as "polluting the list
with useless crap?", I suggest you uninstall Enigmail. Or you could
continue to be incensed over a dozen or so lines of PGP & keep Enigmail
for some other purpose.

Cheers,

Phil...

- --
currently (ab)using
Debian Squeeze, Fedora Verne, OS X Snow Leopard, Ubuntu Oneiric


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJPq+KuAAoJECPmYW6gk8JjLlkH/iyAW21qAEhbKYkZ3gTOgTjp
IJm5FBiGVBkOx0S7qH5+aRNM9uoXUK/Tf4+G+4aCabzl5EqDv2nCdK/lLXT8YDBF
VSHMvsytqf94AY1zDAxME6bAnDNcAjfAPbs0Lyg5tOwlqJssRT/qg6Dutl/Mmsb6
SpfyeLCj843RQbLzGiQh0rYPAnwTunJGw4MgAOEN8qnazureF7YveDhlbO9VI/7e
+7AgC/CYDC3H5ye8YMHg8qF6KW1/25IUAPpzOZ/x/a9SHy55d/vgAhbABh0W4gCm
ZEPTvQSDsz/rX2ch/PTTowAhAGIdS68F4e0VGjAFwfZBDgs2hRliTpcqOf7WECQ=
=DJES
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org

Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4FABE2B6...@gmail.com

[Tony van der Hoff]

As I suspected...

--
Tony van der Hoff | mailto:to...@vanderhoff.org
Buckinghamshire, England |

--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org

Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4FABE349...@vanderhoff.org

[Roger Leigh]

On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 05:49:12PM +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote:

> On Thu, 2012-05-10 at 16:45 +0100, Phil Dobbin wrote:
> > On 10/05/12 16:14, Tony van der Hoff wrote:
> >
> > > So, this message was signed.
> > >
> > > Having recently installed enigmail, to see what all the fuss is about
> > > in the other thread. I find I'm at a loss to understand how to
> > > interpret this.
> > > -------------------------------------------------
> > > OpenPGP Security Info
> > >
> > > Unverified signature
> > >
> > > gpg command line and output:
> > > /usr/bin/gpg
> > > gpg: Signature made Thu 10 May 2012 15:27:47 BST using RSA key ID A093C263
> > > gpg: Can't check signature: public key not found
> > > -------------------------------------------------
> > >
> > > Am I expected to go to some keyserver to find the sender's public key?
> > > How, where, why?
> > >
> > > Maybe I've not set up Enigmail correctly?
> > >
> > > Alternatively, should I just ignore the signature, in which case why
> > > is the sender polluting the list with useless crap?
> >
> > You have an option to import my key under your PGP menu should you wish
> > to do so . If you have installed Enigmail then go ahead & do it.

> With Evolution I can't. I need your keyserver and your keynumber.

The key number is in the message (A093C263 above). The key servers
are all public and mirrored with each other, so just pick one or
more to use. If the person signing the message hasn't uploaded their
key to a public keyserver, then they are perhaps not understanding
what the public key is for ;)


Roger

--
.''`. Roger Leigh
: :' : Debian GNU/Linux http://people.debian.org/~rleigh/
`. `' schroot and sbuild http://alioth.debian.org/projects/buildd-tools
`- GPG Public Key F33D 281D 470A B443 6756 147C 07B3 C8BC 4083 E800

--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org

Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120510155...@codelibre.net

[Ralf Mardorf]

On Thu, 2012-05-10 at 16:45 +0100, Phil Dobbin wrote:

With Evolution I can't. I need your keyserver and your keynumber.

--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org

Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1336664952.4735.10.camel@precise

[Camaleón]

On Thu, 10 May 2012 16:14:12 +0100, Tony van der Hoff wrote:

> So, this message was signed.
>
> Having recently installed enigmail, to see what all the fuss is about in
> the other thread. I find I'm at a loss to understand how to interpret
> this.

(...)

> A093C263 gpg: Can't check signature: public key not found

(...)

> Am I expected to go to some keyserver to find the sender's public key?

It should be done automatically.

> How,

By choosing a server from where to lookup the public keys.

> where,

>From Enigmail configuration settings.

> why?

To validate the signature. Note that a validated signature is not a
verified signature (user's signature can be "valid" but not "trusted").

> Maybe I've not set up Enigmail correctly?

Maybe.

Docs and FAQs can be found here:

http://enigmail.mozdev.org/home/index.php.html

> Alternatively, should I just ignore the signature,

Yes, but then why is that you installed Enigmail, what's your purpose?

> in which case why is the sender polluting the list with useless crap?

The sender is not "polluting" the list, it's the recipient who has to
know how to deal with signatures... should he/she wants.

Greetings,

--
Camaleón

--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org

Archive: http://lists.debian.org/jogotc$qkr$1...@dough.gmane.org

[Ralf Mardorf]

On Thu, 2012-05-10 at 16:14 +0100, Tony van der Hoff wrote:
> Alternatively, should I just ignore the signature, in which case why
> is the sender polluting the list with useless crap?

That's the problem.

For Evolution all mails look ok. Below some mails there's a button that
notifies me, when an email is signed. E.g. "Signature exists, but need
public key"

If I push the button nothing changes.

If there's an info in the mail, I can copy and paste and run

gpg --keyserver [snip] --recv-keys [snip]

Then I close and open Evolution.

Now the button notifies me "Valid signature, but cannot verify sender"

If I push the button nothing changes, I only get verbose output from
gpg.

I don't care about this. Other people send thumbnails with their photos,
with each mail. I also don't care about this. The data doesn't brake the
email and doesn't cost much data or traffic. FWIW sometimes IMO HTML is
better than text, e.g. when sending links or a long command line.

- Ralf

--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org

Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1336664722.4735.9.camel@precise

[Ralf Mardorf]

This resulted in "Valid signature, but cannot verify sender (Phil Dobbin
<bukows...@gmail.com>)":

gpg: armor header: Hash: SHA1
gpg: armor header: Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
gpg: armor header: Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla -
http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
gpg: original file name=''
gpg: Signature made Thu 10 May 2012 05:45:50 PM CEST using RSA key ID
A093C263
gpg: using PGP trust model
gpg: Good signature from "Phil Dobbin <bukows...@gmail.com>"
gpg: aka "[jpeg image of size 518977]"
gpg: WARNING: This key is not certified with a trusted signature!
gpg: There is no indication that the signature belongs to the
owner.
Primary key fingerprint: AADB 6887 80BF 485B EF0D 4DBC 23E6 616E A093
C263
gpg: textmode signature, digest algorithm SHA1

--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org

Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1336665574.5057.2.camel@precise

[Camaleón]

On Thu, 10 May 2012 17:45:22 +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote:

> On Thu, 2012-05-10 at 16:14 +0100, Tony van der Hoff wrote:
>> Alternatively, should I just ignore the signature, in which case why is
>> the sender polluting the list with useless crap?
>
> That's the problem.

(...)

And what's _what you think_ the problem is?

The problem here is that users *don't understand* what a GPG/PGP
signature is.

Greetings,

--
Camaleón

--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org

Archive: http://lists.debian.org/jogp4c$qkr$1...@dough.gmane.org

[Adrian Fita]

On 10/05/12 16:21, Lars Noodén wrote:
> The Debian Administrator's Handbook is available for sale and download:
>
> http://debian-handbook.info/
>
> Regards,
> /Lars

Thank you for this awesome contribution to the community good sir!

--
Fita Adrian

--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org

Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4FABE859...@gmail.com

[Roger Leigh]

On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 05:59:34PM +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> On Thu, 2012-05-10 at 16:55 +0100, Roger Leigh wrote:
> > On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 05:49:12PM +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> > > On Thu, 2012-05-10 at 16:45 +0100, Phil Dobbin wrote:
> > > With Evolution I can't. I need your keyserver and your keynumber.
> >
> > The key number is in the message (A093C263 above). The key servers
> > are all public and mirrored with each other, so just pick one or
> > more to use. If the person signing the message hasn't uploaded their
> > key to a public keyserver, then they are perhaps not understanding
> > what the public key is for ;)
>
> This resulted in "Valid signature, but cannot verify sender (Phil Dobbin
> <bukows...@gmail.com>)":

That's all exactly as it should be. The signature was validated,
i.e. the message was signed with the private key of this key pair.
However, because you've not told gpg that you trust them, gpg can't
verify that the identity is real. After all, anyone can make a key
with a given name and email address--this is not in itself proof of
the origin of the email.

For that, you need to sign their key with your key, which establishes
that you have met them in real life, and that you have associated a
real life individual with that particular private key. For that,
you'll need to look into keysigning and trust relationships with
gpg. You don't even need to meet them personally--you just need to
join the web of trust by trusting someone who trusts them, or even
2 or more hops from that. I've mainly only signed the keys of
Debian developers who are in the UK or were visiting the UK, but
because of this, I can trust people all over the world who aren't
even necessarily associated with Debian.


Regards,

Roger

--
.''`. Roger Leigh
: :' : Debian GNU/Linux http://people.debian.org/~rleigh/
`. `' schroot and sbuild http://alioth.debian.org/projects/buildd-tools
`- GPG Public Key F33D 281D 470A B443 6756 147C 07B3 C8BC 4083 E800

--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org

Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120510161...@codelibre.net

[Brad Rogers]

On Thu, 10 May 2012 16:03:56 +0000 (UTC)
Camaleón <noel...@gmail.com> wrote:

Hello Camaleón,

> On Thu, 10 May 2012 16:14:12 +0100, Tony van der Hoff wrote:
> > Am I expected to go to some keyserver to find the sender's public
> > key?
> It should be done automatically.

Only if GPG is set up to do so. Otherwise manual intervention is
required.

--
Regards _
/ ) "The blindingly obvious is
/ _)rad never immediately apparent"
You're only 29 got a lot to learn
Seventeen - Sex Pistols

[Brad Rogers]

On Thu, 10 May 2012 17:59:34 +0200
Ralf Mardorf <ralf.m...@alice-dsl.net> wrote:

Hello Ralf,

> This resulted in "Valid signature, but cannot verify sender (Phil
> Dobbin <bukows...@gmail.com>)":

Because there's no web of trust involving people that both you and the
keyholder know.

--
Regards _
/ ) "The blindingly obvious is
/ _)rad never immediately apparent"

If Adolf Hitler flew in today, they'd send a limousine anyway
(White Man) In Hammersmith Palais - The Clash

[Tony van der Hoff]

On 10/05/12 17:16, Brad Rogers wrote:
> On Thu, 10 May 2012 17:59:34 +0200
> Ralf Mardorf <ralf.m...@alice-dsl.net> wrote:
>
> Hello Ralf,
>
>> This resulted in "Valid signature, but cannot verify sender (Phil
>> Dobbin <bukows...@gmail.com>)":
>
> Because there's no web of trust involving people that both you and the
> keyholder know.
>

So, the OP signs his mail to a list. I would guess that no web of trust
exists between him and 99.9% of the list members.

What is the benefit of such a signature?

--
Tony van der Hoff | mailto:to...@vanderhoff.org
Buckinghamshire, England |

--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org

Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4FABED9...@vanderhoff.org

[Lars Noodén]

On 5/10/12 7:10 PM, Adrian Fita wrote:
> On 10/05/12 16:21, Lars Noodén wrote:
>> The Debian Administrator's Handbook is available for sale and download:
>>
>> http://debian-handbook.info/
>>
>> Regards,
>> /Lars
>
> Thank you for this awesome contribution to the community good sir!
>

My contribution was to stumble across the link and post it to the list.

Regards
/Lars

--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org

Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4FABEDA2...@gmail.com

[Tony van der Hoff]

On 10/05/12 17:39, Camaleón wrote:

> On Thu, 10 May 2012 17:18:04 +0100, Brad Rogers wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 10 May 2012 16:03:56 +0000 (UTC) Camaleón <noel...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> Hello Camaleón,
>>
>>> On Thu, 10 May 2012 16:14:12 +0100, Tony van der Hoff wrote:
>>>> Am I expected to go to some keyserver to find the sender's public
>>>> key?
>>> It should be done automatically.
>>
>> Only if GPG is set up to do so. Otherwise manual intervention is
>> required.
>

> Enigmail does it with no user intervention.
>
> Greetings,
>
That's not what I found. I think I've now got it set up correctty, but
intervention was needed.

--
Tony van der Hoff | mailto:to...@vanderhoff.org
Buckinghamshire, England |

--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org

Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4FABF00F...@vanderhoff.org

[Camaleón]

On Thu, 10 May 2012 17:18:04 +0100, Brad Rogers wrote:

> On Thu, 10 May 2012 16:03:56 +0000 (UTC) Camaleón <noel...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> Hello Camaleón,
>
>> On Thu, 10 May 2012 16:14:12 +0100, Tony van der Hoff wrote:
>> > Am I expected to go to some keyserver to find the sender's public
>> > key?
>> It should be done automatically.
>
> Only if GPG is set up to do so. Otherwise manual intervention is
> required.

Enigmail does it with no user intervention.

Greetings,

--
Camaleón


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org

Archive: http://lists.debian.org/jogr0l$qkr$1...@dough.gmane.org

[John A. Sullivan III]

Hello, Alberto, and thank you again, Lars; I've been forwarding the link
to all I think would be interested.

I don't want to hijack the thread so I'll spawn a new thread entitled
Dynamic Traffic Shaping - John

--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org

Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1336668080.8...@denise.theartistscloset.com

[Claudius Hubig]

Hello Tony,

Tony van der Hoff <to...@vanderhoff.org> wrote:
> What is the benefit of such a signature?

Those who know him now can verify the signature. In addition, if at
any later stage someone else claims to have posted this message, the
OP can prove that it was indeed him who posted it. Everybody else
interested in either the OP or the message can also verify the
signature (though that might require some work to, for example, meet
the OP personally).

However, you are absolutely free to ignore the signature if it is of
no value to you and most clients will even hide it by default (or
show a small button). There is, however, no way to avoid excessive
quoting, which can easily exceed the size of a signature.

Best regards,

Claudius
--
Patageometry, n.:
The study of those mathematical properties that are invariant
under brain transplants.
http://chubig.net telnet nightfall.org 4242

[Tony van der Hoff]

On 10/05/12 17:40, Claudius Hubig wrote:
> Hello Tony,

>
> However, you are absolutely free to ignore the signature if it is of
> no value to you and most clients will even hide it by default (or
> show a small button).

Thunderbird doesn't appear to. However, having activated enigmail, and
linked it to a keyserver, I'm no longer seeing the block of hex at the
end of messages. I can live with that.

--
Tony van der Hoff | mailto:to...@vanderhoff.org
Buckinghamshire, England |


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org

Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4FABF1B0...@vanderhoff.org

[Camaleón]

On Thu, 10 May 2012 17:42:55 +0100, Tony van der Hoff wrote:

> On 10/05/12 17:39, Camaleón wrote:
>> On Thu, 10 May 2012 17:18:04 +0100, Brad Rogers wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, 10 May 2012 16:03:56 +0000 (UTC) Camaleón <noel...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hello Camaleón,
>>>
>>>> On Thu, 10 May 2012 16:14:12 +0100, Tony van der Hoff wrote:
>>>>> Am I expected to go to some keyserver to find the sender's public
>>>>> key?
>>>> It should be done automatically.
>>>
>>> Only if GPG is set up to do so. Otherwise manual intervention is
>>> required.
>>
>> Enigmail does it with no user intervention.
>>
>>

> That's not what I found. I think I've now got it set up correctty, but
> intervention was needed.

The only user intervention is setting up Enigmail. Once it's configured,
you don't have to do nothing other than selecting/clicking over a signed
message.

Greetings,

--
Camaleón

--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org

Archive: http://lists.debian.org/jogrsu$qkr$1...@dough.gmane.org

[Tony van der Hoff]

On 10/05/12 17:54, Camaleón wrote:
>
> you don't have to do nothing

A double negative, Camaleón? ;)
You have to do something?

--
Tony van der Hoff | mailto:to...@vanderhoff.org
Buckinghamshire, England |

--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org

Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4FABF3F...@vanderhoff.org

[Lars Noodén]

On 5/10/12 7:41 PM, John A. Sullivan III wrote:
[snip]

> Hello, Alberto, and thank you again, Lars; I've been forwarding the link
> to all I think would be interested.

[snip]

Again, the sum of my contribution was to stumble across the link and

post it to the list.

regards,
/Lars

--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org

Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4FABF5E7...@gmail.com

[Camaleón]

On Thu, 10 May 2012 17:59:41 +0100, Tony van der Hoff wrote:

> On 10/05/12 17:54, Camaleón wrote:
>>
>> you don't have to do nothing
>
> A double negative, Camaleón? ;)

In Spanish sounded good O:-)

> You have to do something?

Configure Enigmail.

Greetings,

--
Camaleón

--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org

Archive: http://lists.debian.org/jogsv3$qkr$1...@dough.gmane.org

[Ralf Mardorf]

On Thu, 2012-05-10 at 17:32 +0100, Tony van der Hoff wrote:
> So, the OP signs his mail to a list. I would guess that no web of trust
> exists between him and 99.9% of the list members.

+1

That's what I try to explain.

--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org

Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1336670454.5199.4.camel@precise

[Ralf Mardorf]

On Thu, 2012-05-10 at 18:40 +0200, Claudius Hubig wrote:
> Hello Tony,
>
> Tony van der Hoff <to...@vanderhoff.org> wrote:
> > What is the benefit of such a signature?
>
> Those who know him now can verify the signature. In addition, if at
> any later stage someone else claims to have posted this message, the
> OP can prove that it was indeed him who posted it. Everybody else
> interested in either the OP or the message can also verify the
> signature (though that might require some work to, for example, meet
> the OP personally).

And what is the benefit of this on an open mailing list?
To ensure that somebody called or didn't call somebody else names, gave
right or wrong information? IMO this is infantile. Don't get me wrong!
I'm not against signing, if other people wish to do. It anyway is
senseless.

- Ralf

--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org

Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1336670739.5199.8.camel@precise

[Ralf Mardorf]

On Thu, 2012-05-10 at 16:07 +0000, Camaleón wrote:
On Thu, 10 May 2012 17:45:22 +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote:

>
> > On Thu, 2012-05-10 at 16:14 +0100, Tony van der Hoff wrote:
> >> Alternatively, should I just ignore the signature, in which case
why is
> >> the sender polluting the list with useless crap?
> >

> > That's the problem.
>
> (...)
>
> And what's _what you think_ the problem is?
>
> The problem here is that users *don't understand* what a GPG/PGP
> signature is.
>

Or some do fake that they are dummies, while they aren't?!

On Thu, 2012-05-10 at 17:16 +0100, Brad Rogers wrote:
> On Thu, 10 May 2012 17:59:34 +0200
> Ralf Mardorf <ralf.m...@alice-dsl.net> wrote:
>
> Hello Ralf,
>
> > This resulted in "Valid signature, but cannot verify sender (Phil
> > Dobbin <bukows...@gmail.com>)":
>
> Because there's no web of trust involving people that both you and the
> keyholder know.

Exactly and this is valid for the majority on mailing lists.
Btw. funny photo.

- Ralf

--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org

Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1336670333.5199.3.camel@precise

[Indulekha]

Actually, depending on the editor one uses to compose email, there are
ways to avoid quoting the hideous block of text.
In vim, for instance, just put this in your .vimrc:
map ,kqs :/^[ ]*> -- *$/;?^[ >][ >]*$?;.,/^[ ]*$/-1d<CR>
There also also ways to do this in emacs, jed, etc, but I don't know
them as I just use vim.

--
❤ ♫ ❤ ♫ ❤ ♫ ❤
Indulekha

--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org

Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120510173242.GA25617@radhesyama

[Indulekha]

On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 07:25:39PM +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> On Thu, 2012-05-10 at 18:40 +0200, Claudius Hubig wrote:
> > Hello Tony,
> >
> > Tony van der Hoff <to...@vanderhoff.org> wrote:
> > > What is the benefit of such a signature?
> >
> > Those who know him now can verify the signature. In addition, if at
> > any later stage someone else claims to have posted this message, the
> > OP can prove that it was indeed him who posted it. Everybody else
> > interested in either the OP or the message can also verify the
> > signature (though that might require some work to, for example, meet
> > the OP personally).
>
> And what is the benefit of this on an open mailing list?
> To ensure that somebody called or didn't call somebody else names, gave
> right or wrong information? IMO this is infantile. Don't get me wrong!
> I'm not against signing, if other people wish to do. It anyway is
> senseless.
>

Be careful now Ralf, some people consider their e-peens sacred!

--
❤ ♫ ❤ ♫ ❤ ♫ ❤
Indulekha

--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org

Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120510173619.GB25617@radhesyama

[Brad Rogers]

On Thu, 10 May 2012 17:32:25 +0100

Tony van der Hoff <to...@vanderhoff.org> wrote:

Hello Tony,

> What is the benefit of such a signature?

Read Roger Leigh's message on just that subject. It explains things
well. No point in me saying the same thing again.

--
Regards _
/ ) "The blindingly obvious is
/ _)rad never immediately apparent"

Bet you think you're king but you're really a pawn
When You're Young - The Jam

[Brad Rogers]

On Thu, 10 May 2012 19:18:53 +0200

Ralf Mardorf <ralf.m...@alice-dsl.net> wrote:

Hello Ralf,

> Exactly and this is valid for the majority on mailing lists.

True, but that's not the point. I always PGP sign list mail because it
shows a single source, making it harder for somebody to spoof as me on
the list.

> Btw. funny photo.

'Iconic' is, I think, the word you're looking for.

In point of fact, it was the cover of "Touch" by The Eurythmics. The
one included in this post will be different.

--
Regards _
/ ) "The blindingly obvious is
/ _)rad never immediately apparent"

Why do they try to hide our past pulling down houses and build car parks
Bricks & Mortar - The Jam

[Brad Rogers]

On Thu, 10 May 2012 16:39:49 +0000 (UTC)

Camaleón <noel...@gmail.com> wrote:

Hello Camaleón,

> Enigmail does it with no user intervention.

I don't use Enigmail, but I'd place a small wager that it can be set up
to either pull public keys automatically or manually. What the default
is, IDK.

--
Regards _
/ ) "The blindingly obvious is
/ _)rad never immediately apparent"

Life's short, don't make a mess of it
No Time To Be 21 - The Adverts

[Camaleón]

On Thu, 10 May 2012 19:18:53 +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote:

> On Thu, 2012-05-10 at 16:07 +0000, Camaleón wrote: On Thu, 10 May 2012
> 17:45:22 +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
>>
>> > On Thu, 2012-05-10 at 16:14 +0100, Tony van der Hoff wrote:
>> >> Alternatively, should I just ignore the signature, in which case
> why is
>> >> the sender polluting the list with useless crap?
>> >
>> > That's the problem.
>>
>> (...)
>>
>> And what's _what you think_ the problem is?
>>
>> The problem here is that users *don't understand* what a GPG/PGP
>> signature is.
>>
> Or some do fake that they are dummies, while they aren't?!

If it talks like a dummy, writes like a dummy and looks like a dummy...
it's because it's a dummy.

Greetings,

--
Camaleón

--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org

Archive: http://lists.debian.org/jogv9i$qkr$2...@dough.gmane.org

[Tony van der Hoff]

On 10/05/12 18:25, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> And what is the benefit of this on an open mailing list?
> To ensure that somebody called or didn't call somebody else names, gave
> right or wrong information? IMO this is infantile. Don't get me wrong!
> I'm not against signing, if other people wish to do. It anyway is
> senseless.

I've learned a lot about GPG signing during the last few days. I can see
there are benefits where the recipient needs to be absolutely certain
that the sender is known to him.

That is certainly not the way mailing lists work, so causing a block of
some 400 characters to be sent to each and every subscriber is pure
self-indulgence, on the scale of insisting on sending HTML-formatted
mail. On balance, I think I prefer the latter.

I have come to the conclusion that a GPG signature in these
circumstances says more about the sender's sense of self-importance than
anything else.

Cheers, Tony

--
Tony van der Hoff | mailto:to...@vanderhoff.org
Buckinghamshire, England |

--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org

Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4FAC0199...@vanderhoff.org

[Ralf Mardorf]

On Thu, 2012-05-10 at 18:57 +0100, Tony van der Hoff wrote:
> On 10/05/12 18:25, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> > And what is the benefit of this on an open mailing list?
> > To ensure that somebody called or didn't call somebody else names, gave
> > right or wrong information? IMO this is infantile. Don't get me wrong!
> > I'm not against signing, if other people wish to do. It anyway is
> > senseless.
>
> I've learned a lot about GPG signing during the last few days. I can see
> there are benefits where the recipient needs to be absolutely certain
> that the sender is known to him.
>
> That is certainly not the way mailing lists work, so causing a block of
> some 400 characters to be sent to each and every subscriber is pure
> self-indulgence, on the scale of insisting on sending HTML-formatted
> mail. On balance, I think I prefer the latter.
>
> I have come to the conclusion that a GPG signature in these
> circumstances says more about the sender's sense of self-importance than
> anything else.

I'm uncertain if I should answer off-list or not ;). Because there's
such a tendency to get mails as confident as possible, I thought about
talking about psychotherapy ;). Not for me, I'm hopeless.

I don't care about 400 characters more or less. I also prefer a funny
Iconic or HTML to a signing.

:D

Regards,
Ralf

--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org

Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1336673852.5199.35.camel@precise

[Ralf Mardorf]

On Thu, 2012-05-10 at 12:32 -0500, Indulekha wrote:
> > --
> > Patageometry, n.:
> > The study of those mathematical properties that are invariant
> > under brain transplants.
> > http://chubig.net telnet nightfall.org 4242
>
>
> Actually, depending on the editor one uses to compose email, there are
> ways to avoid quoting the hideous block of text.
> In vim, for instance, just put this in your .vimrc:
> map ,kqs :/^[ ]*> -- *$/;?^[ >][ >]*$?;.,/^[ ]*$/-1d<CR>
> There also also ways to do this in emacs, jed, etc, but I don't know
> them as I just use vim.

And you anyway didn't cut the signature (not signing) of the previous
mail ;).

An open mailing list should be usable with all common mailers. KMail,
Thunderbird, Mutt, Evolution etc..

2 Cents,
Ralf

--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org

Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1336672911.5199.26.camel@precise

[Indulekha]

On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 08:01:51PM +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> On Thu, 2012-05-10 at 12:32 -0500, Indulekha wrote:
> > > --
> > > Patageometry, n.:
> > > The study of those mathematical properties that are invariant
> > > under brain transplants.
> > > http://chubig.net telnet nightfall.org 4242
> >
> >
> > Actually, depending on the editor one uses to compose email, there are
> > ways to avoid quoting the hideous block of text.
> > In vim, for instance, just put this in your .vimrc:
> > map ,kqs :/^[ ]*> -- *$/;?^[ >][ >]*$?;.,/^[ ]*$/-1d<CR>
> > There also also ways to do this in emacs, jed, etc, but I don't know
> > them as I just use vim.
>
> And you anyway didn't cut the signature (not signing) of the previous
> mail ;).
>

Yes, it seems to work only on the gpg/pgp sigs consistently.
I know too little about it, frankly, and got really burned out on having
this kind of issue, so once I managed to not quote the gpg block I
pronounced it "good enough". Interestingly, someone on the list immediately
responded by doing something to elude this, as well as my mutt display-filter,
and also proudly announced his return to "long, weird signatures". That pretty
much proved to me he was deliberately trolling, so I now filter him. Problem
solved.

> An open mailing list should be usable with all common mailers. KMail,
> Thunderbird, Mutt, Evolution etc..
>
> 2 Cents,
> Ralf

+1
But life is chock full of problems other people cause via poor decisions
and defective reasoning, best just learn to work around it. When that can't
be done without strain there's always filtering. But this list is pretty
good, most people are kind, respectful, knowledgeable, and helpful. The
fact I've only felt compelled to filter one person is a very good sign. :)

--
❤ ♫ ❤ ♫ ❤ ♫ ❤
Indulekha

--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org

Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120510190241.GA27644@radhesyama

[Henrique de Moraes Holschuh]

On Thu, 10 May 2012, Tony van der Hoff wrote:
> I've learned a lot about GPG signing during the last few days. I can see
> there are benefits where the recipient needs to be absolutely certain
> that the sender is known to him.

Yes. Or that the sender belongs to a certain group, for which an
authoritative keyring is maintained.

> That is certainly not the way mailing lists work, so causing a block of
> some 400 characters to be sent to each and every subscriber is pure
> self-indulgence, on the scale of insisting on sending HTML-formatted
> mail. On balance, I think I prefer the latter.
>
> I have come to the conclusion that a GPG signature in these
> circumstances says more about the sender's sense of self-importance than
> anything else.

Not always. Debian has a few mailing-lists where only signed mail by a
Debian Developer is accepted (the -announce ones). Also, some information
is considered critical enough that it is always sent signed. And yes,
people DO make a fuss if the signature doesn't verify :)

I've seen lots of PGP/MIME and S/MIME signed mails on MLs over the years,
and any MUA worth using will do something smart with it (such as hide the
mess and not bother the user if he is not validating signatures).

Incorrectly-formatted PGP/MIME, as well as inline signatures are far more
cubbersome on most MUAs, so they're far more likely to cause huge threads
when used in an indiscriminate way.

--
"One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to bring
them all and in the darkness grind them. In the Land of Redmond
where the shadows lie." -- The Silicon Valley Tarot
Henrique Holschuh

--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org

Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120510212...@khazad-dum.debian.net

[Scott Ferguson]

On 11/05/12 07:29, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> On Thu, 10 May 2012, Tony van der Hoff wrote:
>> I've learned a lot about GPG signing during the last few days. I can see
>> there are benefits where the recipient needs to be absolutely certain
>> that the sender is known to him.
>
> Yes. Or that the sender belongs to a certain group, for which an
> authoritative keyring is maintained.
>
>> That is certainly not the way mailing lists work, so causing a block of
>> some 400 characters to be sent to each and every subscriber is pure
>> self-indulgence, on the scale of insisting on sending HTML-formatted
>> mail. On balance, I think I prefer the latter.
>>
>> I have come to the conclusion that a GPG signature in these
>> circumstances says more about the sender's sense of self-importance than
>> anything else.
>
> Not always. Debian has a few mailing-lists where only signed mail by a
> Debian Developer is accepted (the -announce ones). Also, some information
> is considered critical enough that it is always sent signed. And yes,
> people DO make a fuss if the signature doesn't verify :)

And for some people signing their posts is a good idea on any Debian
list. ie. people who hold a position of authority in the Debian community.

However in every one of those cases I've always found a valid web of
trust - likewise with half a dozen posters on this list, even though
I've not met them - I've met or know some of the people in their key
signing chain. 2 or 3 degrees seems to cover most of the globe with
Debian/GNU/Linux, and geographic location has no bearing on whether
other people will sign your key.

>
> I've seen lots of PGP/MIME and S/MIME signed mails on MLs over the years,
> and any MUA worth using will do something smart with it (such as hide the
> mess and not bother the user if he is not validating signatures).

Yes!
If the signer relies on the recipient to jump through hoops to validate
the signature it speaks volumes of the signer. If you have to cut and
paste or perform CLI magic to validate or make a post viewable then the
whole excercise is *unfriendly*.

>
> Incorrectly-formatted PGP/MIME, as well as inline signatures are far more

> cumbersome on most MUAs, so they're far more likely to cause huge threads

> when used in an indiscriminate way.
>

And it will continue to increase as more people start using PGP
signatures and github accounts like digital fetishes. Many people are
convinced a message is from who it says it's from, just because it's
signed - few check the signature and even fewer check the identity of
the signer.

PGP is a convenient and robust system of ensuring the integrity and
authorship of a message when used properly - otherwise it's a convenient
ego toy for the ignorant at the inconvenience of others. Not unlike
animated avatars and advertisements in signatures.

I'd encourage people to use digital signatures where appropriate - but
only if used properly. If it's used properly few people will complain
and using PGP improperly is worse than not using it at all (promotes bad
practices and devalues the protocol).




Kind regards

--
Iceweasel/Firefox/Chrome/Chromium/Iceape/IE extensions for finding
answers to questions about Debian:-
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/collections/Scott_Ferguson/debian/

--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org

Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4FAC41D8...@gmail.com

[Tony Baldwin]

On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 08:07:51PM +0300, Lars Noodén wrote:
> On 5/10/12 7:41 PM, John A. Sullivan III wrote:
> [snip]
> > Hello, Alberto, and thank you again, Lars; I've been forwarding the link
> > to all I think would be interested.
> [snip]
>
> Again, the sum of my contribution was to stumble across the link and
> post it to the list.
>
> regards,
> /Lars
>

my name appears here:
http://static.debian-handbook.info/browse/stable/sect.acknowledgments.html#idp2866736
for translating several chapters (1-5,7-9).
It feels awesome to be able to contribute something to debian,
however trivial.

tony
(aka Anthony Baldwin of Baldwin Linguas)
--
http://www.tonybaldwin.me
all tony, all the time!
3F330C6E

[Jon Dowland]

On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 06:37:35PM +0100, Brad Rogers wrote:
> On Thu, 10 May 2012 16:39:49 +0000 (UTC)
> Camaleón <noel...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hello Camaleón,
>
> > Enigmail does it with no user intervention.
>
> I don't use Enigmail, but I'd place a small wager that it can be set up
> to either pull public keys automatically or manually. What the default
> is, IDK.

I do, and the default is to not auto-fetch public keys.

--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org

Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120511063936.GC14319@debian

[Jon Dowland]

On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 06:57:45PM +0100, Tony van der Hoff wrote:
> That is certainly not the way mailing lists work, so causing a block of
> some 400 characters to be sent to each and every subscriber is pure
> self-indulgence, on the scale of insisting on sending HTML-formatted
> mail. On balance, I think I prefer the latter.

A signature by a modern, strong key (4096/RSA) will be about double that
size. ( I just signed 'date' output to check, the sig was 914 chars.)

--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org

Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120511064739.GE14319@debian

[Jon Dowland]

On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 05:32:25PM +0100, Tony van der Hoff wrote:
> So, the OP signs his mail to a list. I would guess that no web of trust
> exists between him and 99.9% of the list members.
>

> What is the benefit of such a signature?

I don't know Phil Dobbin, I haven't ever met him and I probably never will.
Phil Dobbin exists to me only as a participant on this mailing list. He signs
his mail. Over time, my mental model of Phil Dobbin will be composed entirely
and exclusively based on his conduct on this mailing list. If I ever did meet
him, I might be able to prove that the owner of key A093C263 is legally called
Phil Dobbin in some juristiction or other. What exactly have I gained? This
knowledge means nothing to me. I know many people who are not called by their
legal name anyway. The fact that A093C263 calls himself "Phil Dobbin" is
something I don't need to verify.

In this particular case, the web of trust is not as relevant, since I don't
need it to prove that one mail signed by A093C263 was written by the same
person as another mail signed by A093C263.

[ having said that, it would be nice if things like
http://pgp.cs.uu.nl/mk_path.cgi?FROM=06AAAAAA&TO=A093C263&PATHS=trust+paths
worked. Phil, why not push your key and sigs to pgp.mit.edu? ]

--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org

Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120511064520.GD14319@debian

[Phil Dobbin]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 11/05/12 07:45, Jon Dowland wrote:

> On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 05:32:25PM +0100, Tony van der Hoff wrote:
>> So, the OP signs his mail to a list. I would guess that no web of
>> trust exists between him and 99.9% of the list members.
>>
>> What is the benefit of such a signature?
>
> I don't know Phil Dobbin, I haven't ever met him and I probably
> never will. Phil Dobbin exists to me only as a participant on this
> mailing list. He signs his mail. Over time, my mental model of Phil
> Dobbin will be composed entirely and exclusively based on his
> conduct on this mailing list. If I ever did meet him, I might be
> able to prove that the owner of key A093C263 is legally called Phil
> Dobbin in some juristiction or other. What exactly have I gained?
> This knowledge means nothing to me. I know many people who are not
> called by their legal name anyway. The fact that A093C263 calls
> himself "Phil Dobbin" is something I don't need to verify.
>
> In this particular case, the web of trust is not as relevant, since
> I don't need it to prove that one mail signed by A093C263 was
> written by the same person as another mail signed by A093C263.
>
> [ having said that, it would be nice if things like
> http://pgp.cs.uu.nl/mk_path.cgi?FROM=06AAAAAA&TO=A093C263&PATHS=trust+paths
>
>
worked. Phil, why not push your key and sigs to pgp.mit.edu? ]

Done. & the Dutch pgp authority now hold a copy also.

Now, can we all get back to work please? Four days is a long time to
discuss a subject that's been around to my knowledge for fifteen years :-)

Cheers,

Phil...

- --
currently (ab)using
Debian Squeeze, Fedora Verne, OS X Snow Leopard, Ubuntu Oneiric


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJPrNDNAAoJECPmYW6gk8JjOxsH/0NsJ5Tgs0moske2gEFSijGv
/oZyQ161dRqhNTF20Qsd8mtr05NriXira6avBREtlA1g0Nr1JU88DqgFveRaylYX
f0nG6mkFZazSIqWCkKnEj+olqJLoHD54x/zMPbkZHtz+4dbNx9DQljbTV7xLNpCN
F+9lF7rX/cjq89fzeTiNbBmblmPRO2PRr8EEHComY2btKy+mggVyTCkk5rXTkjlb
hZIJ7A2n/4NerP0C5Lx96Ab6OP9f/mky5Fefkb9JlaG08V0y3bTZweZFEXPwfO8j
xJUCT853g+qPTSWchZtZErb34fLRWT25xF/qpPP5mQAukbk3ybF86ZQ5Wt9TciI=
=uqL4
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org

Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4FACD0CE...@gmail.com

[elbbit]

On 10/05/12 14:21, Lars Noodén wrote:
> The Debian Administrator's Handbook is available for sale and download:
>
> http://debian-handbook.info/
>
> Regards,
> /Lars
>
>

Absolutely brilliant. Many thanks for your effort.

--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org

Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4FACD3B3...@gmail.com

[Terence]

> my name appears here:
> http://static.debian-handbook.info/browse/stable/sect.acknowledgments.html#idp2866736
> for translating several chapters (1-5,7-9).
> It feels awesome to be able to contribute something to debian,
> however trivial.
>
> tony
> (aka Anthony Baldwin of Baldwin Linguas)

For a given value of "trivial"? Please define trivial- It's not
trivial in my book (sorry!).

Its not trivial if it is one of the many threads that bind this
tremendous project together to completion!

Thank you , and all the many others.

Terence

--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org

Archive: http://lists.debian.org/CAFG91EOK0ivL2eAyxBF6jSHS...@mail.gmail.com

[Rob Owens]

On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 04:14:12PM +0100, Tony van der Hoff wrote:
> On 10/05/12 15:27, Phil Dobbin wrote:
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Phil...
>
> So, this message was signed.
>
> Having recently installed enigmail, to see what all the fuss is about
> in the other thread. I find I'm at a loss to understand how to
> interpret this.
> -------------------------------------------------
> OpenPGP Security Info
>
> Unverified signature
>
> gpg command line and output:
> /usr/bin/gpg
> gpg: Signature made Thu 10 May 2012 15:27:47 BST using RSA key ID A093C263
> gpg: Can't check signature: public key not found
> -------------------------------------------------
>
> Am I expected to go to some keyserver to find the sender's public key?
> How, where, why?
>
I believe IceDove's enigmail preferences allow you to specify
"automatically fetch public keys" or something to that effect.

You need to click on the "Display Expert Settings" button and then go to
the keyserver tab.

Or you could manually download all the public keys that you're interested in.

-Rob

--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org

Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120511122...@aurora.owens.net

[Rob Owens]

On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 05:32:25PM +0100, Tony van der Hoff wrote:
> On 10/05/12 17:16, Brad Rogers wrote:
> > On Thu, 10 May 2012 17:59:34 +0200

> > Ralf Mardorf <ralf.m...@alice-dsl.net> wrote:
> >
> > Hello Ralf,
> >

> >> This resulted in "Valid signature, but cannot verify sender (Phil
> >> Dobbin <bukows...@gmail.com>)":
> >
> > Because there's no web of trust involving people that both you and the
> > keyholder know.
> >

> So, the OP signs his mail to a list. I would guess that no web of trust
> exists between him and 99.9% of the list members.
>
> What is the benefit of such a signature?
>

It establishes identity the identity associated with the signature. If
Ralf had been signing his emails for the last 2 years, I would feel
confident that I have a valid public key for "Ralf, the guy on the
debian-user mailing list, who often answers questions about audio". Of
course I don't know if he's "Ralf with black hair", or "Ralf who lives
on Main St.", but for my purposes this is good enough.

If I someday want to send an encrypted message to the Ralf that I know
(debian-user Ralf), I can do it. For me, knowing Ralf's personal
identity is not as important as knowing his online identity because our
relationship is online. As long as I don't forget that, then seeing his
signature in emails is a potential benefit to me.

-Rob


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org

Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120511123...@aurora.owens.net

[Jeremy T. Bouse]

On 05/11/2012 08:34 AM, Rob Owens wrote:
> On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 05:32:25PM +0100, Tony van der Hoff wrote:
>> On 10/05/12 17:16, Brad Rogers wrote:
>>> On Thu, 10 May 2012 17:59:34 +0200
>>> Ralf Mardorf <ralf.m...@alice-dsl.net> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hello Ralf,
>>>
>>>> This resulted in "Valid signature, but cannot verify sender (Phil
>>>> Dobbin <bukows...@gmail.com>)":
>>>
>>> Because there's no web of trust involving people that both you and the
>>> keyholder know.
>>>
>> So, the OP signs his mail to a list. I would guess that no web of trust
>> exists between him and 99.9% of the list members.
>>
>> What is the benefit of such a signature?
>>
> It establishes identity the identity associated with the signature. If
> Ralf had been signing his emails for the last 2 years, I would feel
> confident that I have a valid public key for "Ralf, the guy on the
> debian-user mailing list, who often answers questions about audio". Of
> course I don't know if he's "Ralf with black hair", or "Ralf who lives
> on Main St.", but for my purposes this is good enough.
>
> If I someday want to send an encrypted message to the Ralf that I know
> (debian-user Ralf), I can do it. For me, knowing Ralf's personal
> identity is not as important as knowing his online identity because our
> relationship is online. As long as I don't forget that, then seeing his
> signature in emails is a potential benefit to me.
>

GPG/PGP signatures will only ever have any real value to you if you're
part of a strong key set within the web of trust. That is to say if your
key and the other person's key have a chain of signatures from people
who have actually met and followed best practices for verifying the
identity before signing keys. Then, and only then, could you look at the
signature chain between your key and theirs and be confident in the true
identity. If I only sign the keys of people I have personally verified
and then they in turn only sign keys of people they have personally
verified then you can trust them to be an introducer. Their signature on
another key will let you know that they've verified them and because you
trust them then you can then trust this new key you've not signed.

It is a lot like getting a reference for someone. If you don't trust
their judgment are you honestly gonna trust them as a reference for
someone you haven't met? Along that same analogy, I prefer PGP/MIME
signatures as they are unobtrusive but available for verification by
those that wish to do so. Inline simply generates too much needless
noise and is a method that's at least 10 years out dated since the
PGP/MIME standard was adopted.

--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org

Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4FAD1131...@undergrid.net

[Brad Rogers]

On Fri, 11 May 2012 09:16:33 -0400
"Jeremy T. Bouse" <jeremy...@undergrid.net> wrote:

Hello Jeremy,

> those that wish to do so. Inline simply generates too much needless
> noise and is a method that's at least 10 years out dated since the
> PGP/MIME standard was adopted.

Whilst the above is true, it's also true that inline signing isn't going
away soon because of certain companies reticence about implementing it
correctly or at all.

--
Regards _
/ ) "The blindingly obvious is
/ _)rad never immediately apparent"

The public wants what the public gets
Going Underground - The Jam

[Indulekha]

On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 02:47:04PM +0100, Brad Rogers wrote:
> On Fri, 11 May 2012 09:16:33 -0400
> "Jeremy T. Bouse" <jeremy...@undergrid.net> wrote:
>
> Hello Jeremy,
>
> > those that wish to do so. Inline simply generates too much needless
> > noise and is a method that's at least 10 years out dated since the
> > PGP/MIME standard was adopted.
>
> Whilst the above is true, it's also true that inline signing isn't going
> away soon because of certain companies reticence about implementing it
> correctly or at all.
>

I think the point is that if a person knows how to sign then they know
how to sign only what is necessary.
This list does not required signed email, nor does it only recognize
inline. So really, it's pretty simple issue. Can't imagine why so many
people fail to grasp it, unless they just don't want to.
As Scott said, it becomes a digital fetish for some people.

--
❤ ♫ ❤ ♫ ❤ ♫ ❤
Indulekha

--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org

Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120511141223.GA15035@radhesyama

[Brad Rogers]

On Fri, 11 May 2012 14:47:04 +0100
Brad Rogers <br...@fineby.me.uk> wrote:

Hello Brad,

> Whilst the above is true, it's also true that inline signing isn't
> going away soon because of certain companies reticence about
> implementing it correctly or at all.

Where "it" refers to the PGP/MIME standard, of course.

--
Regards _
/ ) "The blindingly obvious is
/ _)rad never immediately apparent"

It's got nothing to do with the need to impress
Titanic (My Over) Reaction - 999

[Siard]

On Thu, 10 May 2012 16:21 +0300, Lars Noodén wrote:
> The Debian Administrator's Handbook is available for sale and
> download:
>
> http://debian-handbook.info/

... and now in Sid.

apt-get install debian-handbook

--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org

Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120511170716.1...@kpnplanet.nl

[Camaleón]

On Thu, 10 May 2012 18:57:45 +0100, Tony van der Hoff wrote:

> I've learned a lot about GPG signing during the last few days. I can see
> there are benefits where the recipient needs to be absolutely certain
> that the sender is known to him.

Yes.

And also the sender wants to ensure his/her posts are not impersonated.

<mode remember on>

We once faced a problem with faked posts in another mailing list. There
was a user (with a severe Tourette Syndrom) that sent messages with the
intention to fake the real sender who were usual participants on that
mailing list. Since that episode, many users started to sign their posts
to avoid further problems and misinterpretations.

</mode remmber off>

> That is certainly not the way mailing lists work, so causing a block of
> some 400 characters to be sent to each and every subscriber is pure
> self-indulgence, on the scale of insisting on sending HTML-formatted
> mail. On balance, I think I prefer the latter.

Not at all because is not a sender's problem that the recipient of his/
her message uses a MUA that can't handle GPG/GPG signatures. And there is
no rule in Debian mailing list Code of Conduct that says nothing against
the usage of this while there is one about using HTML based formatted
posts. In the end, GPG/PGP signatures can be also handled from a terminal
console and they don't break the content of the message which can be
still be read in clear text (even if they cannot be verified) thus you
can't compare the hassle that causes a GPG/PGP signature with the
nuisance of HTML messages: GPG/PGP signatures fallback mode is user-
friendly and fair.

> I have come to the conclusion that a GPG signature in these
> circumstances says more about the sender's sense of self-importance than
> anything else.

I don't know how is that you reached to that conclusion. Maybe is that
you should revisit your understanding on what a GPG/PGP signature is all
about.

Greetings,

--
Camaleón

--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org

Archive: http://lists.debian.org/joj9gd$pnh$8...@dough.gmane.org

[Tony van der Hoff]

On 11/05/12 13:23, Rob Owens wrote:
> Or you could manually download all the public keys that you're interested in.
>

On this list, that equates to zero. Which is why all those who sign
their messages are wasting their time on an ego-trip.

--
Tony van der Hoff | mailto:to...@vanderhoff.org
Buckinghamshire, England |

--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org

Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4FAD2FA6...@vanderhoff.org

[Camaleón]

On Thu, 10 May 2012 18:37:35 +0100, Brad Rogers wrote:

> On Thu, 10 May 2012 16:39:49 +0000 (UTC) Camaleón <noel...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> Hello Camaleón,
>
>> Enigmail does it with no user intervention.
>
> I don't use Enigmail, but I'd place a small wager that it can be set up
> to either pull public keys automatically or manually. What the default
> is, IDK.

As I recall it (I had to setup Enigmail not so long ago) there was an
option to do this automatically, but let me search at the manual.

Okay, here it is:

http://www.rainydayz.org/node/89

9. Preferences » 9.1. Setting the preferences
9.1.5. Keyserver

"(...) If you want, you may enter a keyserver name in the field
Automatically download keys for signature verification from the following
keyserver. Enigmail will then automatically try to download from the
specified keyserver any public key needed to verify signed messages. If
you use this option, specify only one name."

So by setting this it should be done ;-)

The only manual intervention required could be when the key cannot be
fetched from the specified server (missing key, no Internet connection,
server is down...) and you have to manually import it into your local
keyring in order to validate the user's signature.

Greetings,

--
Camaleón

--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org

Archive: http://lists.debian.org/jojd7h$pnh$1...@dough.gmane.org

[Slavko]

Ahoj,

Dňa Fri, 11 May 2012 16:26:30 +0100 Tony van der Hoff
<to...@vanderhoff.org> napísal:

> On 11/05/12 13:23, Rob Owens wrote:
> > Or you could manually download all the public keys that you're
> > interested in.
> >
> On this list, that equates to zero. Which is why all those who sign
> their messages are wasting their time on an ego-trip.
>

I will paraphrase your words:

Why you are wasting your time on an ego-trip to fill your name in sender
header? On this list is this information not needed and by the email
principle is its information value equal to zero and email address must be
enough for this purpose.

regards

--
Slavko
http://slavino.sk

[Phil Dobbin]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

& on the strength of that message, Slavko, it gave me great pleasure to
import & sign your key :-)

Cheers,

Phil...

- --
currently (ab)using
Debian Squeeze, Fedora Verne, OS X Snow Leopard, Ubuntu Oneiric


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJPrUMZAAoJECPmYW6gk8Jj6U0H/0TUY2ryUYYn/5DXoxutilOO
Va9T+/WOKG/A+oPN4GmzsS92UN0Rq+LS640+CVtzHphYCmapzQ3ypSqo5eQ4q4mo
hQV2Mgo/r9H/O8pSApdO9JIOy6iF4Z8JoAkVByU6sH1bBZV1nUPosMHs8EQ5y14S
vubmsHNuVRfiTd9pYm7R+bhd8wG+i2u3Ru0Y7MIXcGqGH8DCJ1v/8Y4dK/E8uCI7
lBfpITA75axNSu/+pqGHzpBYU0Mh4KC8CPAAyuYkug4ydDi6Z0et1JHmgX/cmRQ6
cgkXch1CedmWb7EwlXIrG2qyMHy4Jp1iaf7mNZ6OJWDkLLmyWIt4ERRA/8UPEQM=
=uERl
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org

Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4FAD431A...@gmail.com

[Chris Bannister]

On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 02:59:25PM +0000, Camaleón wrote:
> <mode remember on>
>
> We once faced a problem with faked posts in another mailing list. There
> was a user (with a severe Tourette Syndrom) that sent messages with the

And you could tell this from his/her posts?, amazing!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tourette_syndrome

--
"Religion is excellent stuff for keeping common people quiet."
-- Napoleon Bonaparte

--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org

Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120511164935.GA10069@tal

[Chris Bannister]

On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 03:18:02PM +0100, Brad Rogers wrote:
> > Whilst the above is true, it's also true that inline signing isn't
> > going away soon because of certain companies reticence about
> > implementing it correctly or at all.
>
> Where "it" refers to the PGP/MIME standard, of course.

Even if Enigmail made PGP/MIME the default, or even better remove inline
signing completely?

--
"Religion is excellent stuff for keeping common people quiet."
-- Napoleon Bonaparte

--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org

Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120511165312.GB10069@tal

[Brad Rogers]

On Sat, 12 May 2012 04:53:12 +1200
Chris Bannister <cbann...@slingshot.co.nz> wrote:

Hello Chris,

> Even if Enigmail made PGP/MIME the default, or even better remove
> inline signing completely?

I wasn't thinking of Enigmail/Mozilla, but Microsoft. Microsoft's
software doesn't produce PGP/MIME sigs and their reading of same is
broken. Or at least was last time I had to use any of their software.

--
Regards _
/ ) "The blindingly obvious is
/ _)rad never immediately apparent"

You never listen to a word that I said
Public Image - Public Image Ltd

[Ralf Mardorf]

On Fri, 2012-05-11 at 19:09 +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> On Fri, 2012-05-11 at 19:05 +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote:

> > On Sat, 2012-05-12 at 04:49 +1200, Chris Bannister wrote:
> > > And you could tell this from his/her posts?, amazing!
> > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tourette_syndrome
> >

> > Hobby-psychologist are able to do this. The less differential diagnosis
> > you know, the easier it is to defame. The ICE + DSM together already are
> > ridiculous for serious psychology and most people even don't know those.
>
> ICD not ICE ;)

I'm a troll :p

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosenhan_experiment

--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org

Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1336756312.8142.14.camel@precise

[Ralf Mardorf]

On Fri, 2012-05-11 at 19:05 +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> On Sat, 2012-05-12 at 04:49 +1200, Chris Bannister wrote:

> > And you could tell this from his/her posts?, amazing!
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tourette_syndrome
>

> Hobby-psychologist are able to do this. The less differential diagnosis
> you know, the easier it is to defame. The ICE + DSM together already are
> ridiculous for serious psychology and most people even don't know those.

ICD not ICE ;)

--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org

Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1336756193.8142.13.camel@precise

[Ralf Mardorf]

On Sat, 2012-05-12 at 04:49 +1200, Chris Bannister wrote:

> And you could tell this from his/her posts?, amazing!
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tourette_syndrome

Hobby-psychologist are able to do this. The less differential diagnosis
you know, the easier it is to defame. The ICE + DSM together already are
ridiculous for serious psychology and most people even don't know those.

--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org

Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1336755928.8142.12.camel@precise

[Camaleón]

On Sat, 12 May 2012 04:49:36 +1200, Chris Bannister wrote:

> On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 02:59:25PM +0000, Camaleón wrote:
>> <mode remember on>
>>
>> We once faced a problem with faked posts in another mailing list. There
>> was a user (with a severe Tourette Syndrom) that sent messages with the
>
> And you could tell this from his/her posts?, amazing!
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tourette_syndrome

No, it was the same user who told us about his illness and we could check
that he was saying the truth -not just because of his distasteful
writings- but he had published some articles about himself speaking for
his situation and was well known over Internet.

Greetings,

--
Camaleón

--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org

Archive: http://lists.debian.org/joji6n$pnh$1...@dough.gmane.org

[Ralf Mardorf]

On Fri, 2012-05-11 at 17:27 +0000, Camaleón wrote:
> On Sat, 12 May 2012 04:49:36 +1200, Chris Bannister wrote:
>
> > On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 02:59:25PM +0000, Camaleón wrote:
> >> <mode remember on>
> >>
> >> We once faced a problem with faked posts in another mailing list. There
> >> was a user (with a severe Tourette Syndrom) that sent messages with the
> >
> > And you could tell this from his/her posts?, amazing!
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tourette_syndrome
>
> No, it was the same user who told us about his illness and we could check
> that he was saying the truth -not just because of his distasteful
> writings- but he had published some articles about himself speaking for
> his situation and was well known over Internet.

:)

--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org

Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1336757510.9374.0.camel@precise

[Arnt Karlsen]

On Fri, 11 May 2012 19:11:52 +0200, Ralf wrote in message
<1336756312.8142.14.camel@precise>:

> On Fri, 2012-05-11 at 19:09 +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> > On Fri, 2012-05-11 at 19:05 +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> > > On Sat, 2012-05-12 at 04:49 +1200, Chris Bannister wrote:
> > > > And you could tell this from his/her posts?, amazing!
> > > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tourette_syndrome
> > >
> > > Hobby-psychologist are able to do this. The less differential
> > > diagnosis you know, the easier it is to defame. The ICE + DSM
> > > together already are ridiculous for serious psychology and most
> > > people even don't know those.
> >
> > ICD not ICE ;)
>
> I'm a troll :p
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosenhan_experiment

..as a native Troll National, I'm eminently pleased to confirm
that keeping a trawl going at troll speeds, commonly requires
at least one ICE. ;o)

--
..med vennlig hilsen = with Kind Regards from Arnt Karlsen
...with a number of polar bear hunters in his ancestry...
Scenarios always come in sets of three:
best case, worst case, and just in case.

--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org

Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120511213...@celsius.lan

[Jochen Spieker]

Jeremy T. Bouse:

> On 05/11/2012 08:34 AM, Rob Owens wrote:
>>
>> If I someday want to send an encrypted message to the Ralf that I know
>> (debian-user Ralf), I can do it. For me, knowing Ralf's personal
>> identity is not as important as knowing his online identity because our
>> relationship is online. As long as I don't forget that, then seeing his
>> signature in emails is a potential benefit to me.
>>
>
> GPG/PGP signatures will only ever have any real value to you if you're
> part of a strong key set within the web of trust.

Please read Rob's e-mail again.

I don't need any signatures on my key in order for you to be able to
send an encrypted e-mail to "Jochen from debian-user(-german)". Your
e-mail will not be readable by anyone but the person who signed hundreds
of e-mails to this and other lists.

Another aspect: last yeas I married and adopted my wife's name. My
habit of signing public e-mails allows everyone verify that "Jochen
Spieker" is actually the same person as "Jochen Schulz" (my birth name).

My main reason for signing public e-mails is to invite people to encrypt
their e-mails to me. Signing is the easiest way to express that I (know
how to) use PGP/GPG and that I prefer encrypted communication. In my
opinion, the question is not why we should encrypt our communication,
but why we should /not/.

Of course, that is just an invitation which I think should be as
unobtrusive as possible. PGP/MIME is the best way to do that.

J.
--
Whenever I hear the word 'art' I reach for my visa card.
[Agree] [Disagree]
<http://www.slowlydownward.com/NODATA/data_enter2.html>

[Scott Ferguson]

Paraphrase yes. Useful analogy I don't believe so.

A better analogy would be:-
Is the post reduced in value if Tony's was name was not added to the
sender field?

The answer is yes. Same applies if I take your name out of your post.


Try it on a case by case basis with all the posts on this list.
The answer remains yes.


Now apply the same analogy to digital signatures.
In *many* cases the value is *only* reduced in the opinion of the poster.

If the value of a digital signature is appreciated by the poster and
*not* appreciated by the recipient I'd be wary of advising the recipient
to "man up" and "adapt". It could sound like you're ordering someone to
endure just so you can feel good - an argument winnable only from a
position of constant advantage (will ultimately fail).

People have a perfect right to object to signatures - even non-PGP ones.
Just as people have a perfect right to use signatures, provided they
comply with the rules of conduct... if people don't want to download the
signature (or it's embedded pictures) it's their call, just as it's the
call of those who want to bully their signatures onto others.

I object to inline signatures - but I won't filter out the posts just
because of the signatures and I'd hope that most people are the same.

There are a number of posters on this list that I wish *would* use
digital signatures with a valid web of trust - that'd save me double
checking their information. Stan, Stephen, and several others tend to
draw from a personal store of knowledge I can't quickly verify - but I
trust their opinion. If I could verify *them* I'd be happier. But it's
not that simple - people also have a right *not* to verify themselves or
their posts. Security and privacy are inseparable.


Damn choices, free will, liberty,
mutter, mutter... ;-p


Kind regards

--
Iceweasel/Firefox/Chrome/Chromium/Iceape/IE extensions for finding
answers to questions about Debian:-
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/collections/Scott_Ferguson/debian/

--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org

Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4FADCCA9...@gmail.com

[Jari Fredriksson]

On 12.5.2012 2:45, Jochen Spieker wrote:
> My main reason for signing public e-mails is to invite people to encrypt
> their e-mails to me. Signing is the easiest way to express that I (know
> how to) use PGP/GPG and that I prefer encrypted communication. In my
> opinion, the question is not why we should encrypt our communication,
> but why we should /not/.
>
> Of course, that is just an invitation which I think should be as
> unobtrusive as possible. PGP/MIME is the best way to do that.

+1

--

FORTUNE PROVIDES QUESTIONS FOR THE GREAT ANSWERS: #4
A: Go west, young man, go west!
Q: What do wabbits do when they get tiwed of wunning awound?

[Ralf Mardorf]

On Sat, 2012-05-12 at 08:59 +0300, Jari Fredriksson wrote:
> the question is not why we should encrypt our communication,
> but why we should /not/

I encrypt some of my communication by openPGP too. No doubt about it,
there are valid reasons to encrypt some emails. But signing emails to an
open mailing list to make people aware that you know how to encrypt
mails IMO is improper. And btw. the question still is "Why should we
encrypt communication?" and not "Why shouldn't we encrypt
communication?". I hope PGP fetishists are aware about other security
issues, such as the possibility to read a tube monitor by using an
antenna, from a neighboring house. I won't make all security gaps
public. Cracking encryption takes 20 years with a super computer. The
most common gap is to keep the personal key on the computer, since
cracking the passphrase does take some minutes. Btw. I keep the personal
key on my computer. For me PGP is just a way to ensure a low level
security. PGP becomes useful for anonymous mailing etc.,when several
servers are involved, but it's less secure for private mails.

My mailer is able to display HTML, should I format in HTML to make
people aware, that I'm able to read HTML formated text?

For those using a 56k modem traffic might be important. I don't think
that storage of emails is an issue for anybody.

It might be more considerate to quit signing by default.

Conspiracy regards,
Ralf

PS: A poster from a German high-rise bunker: "Feind hört mit denk immer
dran, vertrau nicht blind dem Nebenmann" I try to translate: "The enemy
is always listening, don't trust the person beside you"
We should create a world of trust, instead of hanging on conspiracy
theories.

--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org

Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1336805504.2741.26.camel@precise

[Slavko]

Hi,

Dňa Sat, 12 May 2012 12:36:25 +1000 Scott Ferguson
<scott.ferguso...@gmail.com> napísal:

> Paraphrase yes. Useful analogy I don't believe so.

from your point of view... But from my point it is analogy.

> A better analogy would be:-
> Is the post reduced in value if Tony's was name was not added to the
> sender field?

the same as above. At first i want to remove my name from this post, but
i see, that i am very lazy ;-)

My english is poor, then it is terrible to write long answers for me. I
hope, that i will write it in proper manner...

For me the name in sender has no value. For one good reason - i never meet
anybody from this list, then i cannot create association with name and
person, and then i mostly don't read the name at all.

But, consider, that i will read this list for long time. After some time i
will see that some senders posts here good solutions and another not. I am
sure, that you know it: some people know what they are writing, and others
are writing what they know... When i will want distinguish these senders i
will read the names and then you will right.

But now about principle - anybody on the word can add "Slavko" as
name in sender header. Many people can add the whole line ("Slavko
<linux(blee)slavino.sk>") as sender (i want no discuss here why, who and
when). As you can see, the sender header of the many people can be
identical with my sender header. Then when i will depend on sender only, i
can get false positives and then the real value of this field is nearer
zero for me. Yes, here exists many people for which it is enough and many
people, which do not know about unreliability of this header. And many
others simply trust...

Consider the same with PGP signature. Can anybody on the word sign his
name and address? Yes, they can. Can anybody sign for my name and email?
Yes, they can. But will be the signature of the anybody identical with my?
No, the digital signatures will not be identical (again, i want no discuss
here about key cracking etc. - i am not cryptology expert). Then i am able
to identify mail's sender, and then this signature has value for me.

I still cannot create association between mail sender and person, but this
is about web of trust and this was discussed before by another senders.

I will go back to start now. Consider that i have reason to distinguish
the senders. For some people is enough to see sender mail, for another is
enough to see name in sender, and for another else are both (name and
email) needed. But still here are some people, for which, the more
reliability is needed.

The included digital signature is for these, which are seeking it and
others can ignore it. It is not about his "ego-trip", it is about
providing option to receivers. And this "ego-trip" was goal of my
paraphrasing.

This is my point of view.

> People have a perfect right to object to signatures - even non-PGP ones.
> Just as people have a perfect right to use signatures, provided they
> comply with the rules of conduct... if people don't want to download the
> signature (or it's embedded pictures) it's their call, just as it's the
> call of those who want to bully their signatures onto others.
>
> I object to inline signatures - but I won't filter out the posts just
> because of the signatures and I'd hope that most people are the same.

One example from my live: I am using Linux at home, Windows at work and i
have some Android tablet too.

* On linux here is not problem to find solution and as you see, my
signature is PGP/MIME.
* It was a lot of searching for me to get MUA for Windows with GPG
support (early mentioned Thunderbird and Enigmail) and i see no others
equivalents exists (or only very old or commercial).
* Some time was needed for searching the same for my Android and here i
found only one, but it supports only inline PGP, then i have problem
with mails with GPG/Mime

A lot of my friends uses GPG/Inline for me now, because they know about my
Android GPG problem. And analogically, if i will respond here from my
Android, my mail will be signed by GPG/Inline - will be i the ignorant?

My conclusion:

In freedom world i am respecting sender's option to don't fill his name, i
will respect his option to fill his name too. I will respect the "Micky
Maus" as name too. I will respect mail sender's option about don't
including digital signature, as well as including it in any manners. Why?
Because these all are sender's freedom options. I have freedom too. I can
filter unwanted messages (yes, i know, filter by unreliable sender
header), or go out from mail list. Or, more simply, i can tell to self,
that this (GPG/Inline) is not for me, because i am not only one recipient
in this ML, and ignore these mails (most used key on my keyboard seems to
be the Delete key).

[Jon Dowland]

On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 06:16:28PM +0100, Brad Rogers wrote:
> I wasn't thinking of Enigmail/Mozilla, but Microsoft. Microsoft's
> software doesn't produce PGP/MIME sigs and their reading of same is
> broken. Or at least was last time I had to use any of their software.

MS Exchange at least recognises PGP/MIME as being "something": it shows
a little "signed" icon against such mails. It doesn't identify or treat
inline signed messages any differently to normal.

--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org

Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120512080119.GA27051@debian

[T Elcor]

--- On Fri, 5/11/12, Scott Ferguson <scott.ferguso...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Paraphrase yes. Useful analogy I don't believe so.
>
> A better analogy would be:-
> Is the post reduced in value if Tony's was name was not
> added to the
> sender field?
>
> The answer is yes.

Not necessarily. If there were several users with the same name on this list, a full email address would be a better identifier than name. And if someone decided to use the same name AND email address as another user, signing one's messages would be a good idea to avoid confusion/misrepresentation.

Anyway, this interesting discussion seems to begin going in circles, so the important points for me are:

1. Debian Code of Conduct has nothing against signing one's emails, inline or otherwise, while other things like HTML emails and spam are explicitly forbidden (yet they appear almost daily anyway). See http://www.debian.org/MailingLists/#codeofconduct

2. Some people consider the practice of signing their emails useful, as it provides some benefits to them.

3. Even if one doesn't agree with such a practice, it's pretty harmless comparing to some other uses or abuses of the list.

4. If one still feels strongly that signed emails should not be used on this list, one may want to suggest such a change to the Debian Code of Conduct. I doubt it would pass though.

HTH

--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org

Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1336812192.22739...@web121906.mail.ne1.yahoo.com

[Ralf Mardorf]

On Sat, 2012-05-12 at 01:43 -0700, T Elcor wrote:
> If one still feels strongly that signed emails should not be used on
> this list, one may want to suggest such a change to the Debian Code of
> Conduct.

I'm against general signing, but I guess we should be free to use it, if
we wont use it and it's good if some Debian developers sign, to ensure
that they are really the developers. There's useful signing and OTOH an
idiotic signing fetish. IIUC this is what all those discussions are
about. It's not a discussion against signing on an open mailing list per
se.

--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org

Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1336812936.2121.23.camel@precise

[Brad Rogers]

On Sat, 12 May 2012 09:01:19 +0100
Jon Dowland <jm...@debian.org> wrote:

Hello Jon,

> MS Exchange at least recognises PGP/MIME as being "something": it shows
> a little "signed" icon against such mails.

An improvement on OE, certainly. That used to see the PGP/MIME signed
message and treat the text part as an attachment.

--
Regards _
/ ) "The blindingly obvious is
/ _)rad never immediately apparent"

There's no point in asking you'll get no reply
Pretty Vacant - Sex Pistols

[Camaleón]

On Fri, 11 May 2012 19:31:50 +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote:

> On Fri, 2012-05-11 at 17:27 +0000, Camaleón wrote:
>> On Sat, 12 May 2012 04:49:36 +1200, Chris Bannister wrote:
>>
>> > On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 02:59:25PM +0000, Camaleón wrote:
>> >> <mode remember on>
>> >>
>> >> We once faced a problem with faked posts in another mailing list.
>> >> There was a user (with a severe Tourette Syndrom) that sent messages
>> >> with the
>> >
>> > And you could tell this from his/her posts?, amazing!
>> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tourette_syndrome
>>
>> No, it was the same user who told us about his illness and we could
>> check that he was saying the truth -not just because of his distasteful
>> writings- but he had published some articles about himself speaking for
>> his situation and was well known over Internet.
>
> :)

I don't know why is that you smile. For the people involved it was not
funny at all :-(

Greetings,

--
Camaleón

--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org

Archive: http://lists.debian.org/jolcfk$s0$4...@dough.gmane.org

[Ralf Mardorf]

> Selling guns?

Apologize! Context! Selling guns to the wrong people, with a bad
intention is unethically, but it isn't unethically to sell guns per se.

I don't own weapons myself, but I've got no problems with people who
learned how to use and not to use a weapon secure and ethically. I'm
able to do this myself, but I don't need a weapon.

--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org

Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1336819231.2121.45.camel@precise

[Indulekha]

Please don't troll.
The phrrase "selling guns" doesn't even appear in the email you're
claiming to repond to. If you're going to hysterically "paraphrase"
someone, please make sure you inform us of that fact.

--
❤ ♫ ❤ ♫ ❤ ♫ ❤
Indulekha

--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org

Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120512105228.GA8953@radhesyama

[Ralf Mardorf]

On Sat, 2012-05-12 at 10:02 +0000, Camaleón wrote:
> I don't know why is that you smile. For the people involved it was not
> funny at all :-(

If you know about tics than it shouldn't be an issue. I'm an idiot
myself and once I met another highly gifted idiot. He was a stutterer.
This was an issue, since it takes minutes to communicate spoken, what
usually is possible in seconds. I anyway enjoy talking with him, since
all the other people on that party who thought that he might be
intellectually disabled, didn't nearly reach his IQ.
I would like to have more tolerance on this planet.

I don't like "normal" people, they're suspect to me. What exactly is
"normal"? Raping children? Selling guns? Dunno! Most of so called
"anomalous people" usually don't do unethical things that often as
averaged people do.

- Ralf

--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org

Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1336818061.2121.40.camel@precise

[Camaleón]

On Sat, 12 May 2012 12:40:31 +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote:

Ralf, be very cautious when quoting...

>> Selling guns?

What the hell are you (if that were you) talking about?

> Apologize! Context! Selling guns to the wrong people, with a bad
> intention is unethically, but it isn't unethically to sell guns per se.

(...)

What I explained was a serious and delicate issue, nothing funny and
nothing to do with "ethical or unethical" actions but a disease >:-/

Greetings,

--
Camaleón

--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org

Archive: http://lists.debian.org/jolgh9$s0$1...@dough.gmane.org

[Brad Rogers]

On Sat, 12 May 2012 05:52:28 -0500
Indulekha <indu...@theunworthy.com> wrote:

Hello Indulekha,

> Please don't troll.
> The phrrase "selling guns" doesn't even appear in the email you're

It did; You just saw the follow-up before the message it was replying
to. Exactly the same happened here.

--
Regards _
/ ) "The blindingly obvious is
/ _)rad never immediately apparent"

Go away, come back, go away, come back
Leave Me Alone (I'm Lonely) - P!nk

[Indulekha]

On Sat, May 12, 2012 at 12:18:11PM +0100, Brad Rogers wrote:
> On Sat, 12 May 2012 05:52:28 -0500
> Indulekha <indu...@theunworthy.com> wrote:
>
> Hello Indulekha,
>
> > Please don't troll.
> > The phrrase "selling guns" doesn't even appear in the email you're
>
> It did; You just saw the follow-up before the message it was replying
> to. Exactly the same happened here.
>

Ah, ok. Yes, I do see it now.
Apologies to Ralf!

--
❤ ♫ ❤ ♫ ❤ ♫ ❤
Indulekha


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org

Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120512112845.GA9757@radhesyama

[Camaleón]

On Sat, 12 May 2012 12:18:11 +0100, Brad Rogers wrote:

> On Sat, 12 May 2012 05:52:28 -0500
> Indulekha <indu...@theunworthy.com> wrote:
>
> Hello Indulekha,
>
>> Please don't troll.
>> The phrrase "selling guns" doesn't even appear in the email you're
>
> It did; You just saw the follow-up before the message it was replying
> to. Exactly the same happened here.

Brad,

I received first the "second" message (his reply to himself) and because
he removed the name of the person who wrote the cited text, the message
was unreferenced at all.

Greetings,

--
Camaleón

--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org

Archive: http://lists.debian.org/joliii$s0$1...@dough.gmane.org

[Camaleón]

On Sat, 12 May 2012 12:21:01 +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote:

> On Sat, 2012-05-12 at 10:02 +0000, Camaleón wrote:
>> I don't know why is that you smile. For the people involved it was not
>> funny at all :-(
>
> If you know about tics than it shouldn't be an issue.

(...)

Ralf, I don't know how to tell this with plain (and kind) words becasue
you seem don't understanding nothing at all... from nothing.

In a mailing list there is no "face to face" comunication, you only get
mesages from a person that you don't know and you had no previous
relation with and you are unaware of his real intentions... So, if a
person starts sending posts impersonating you, insulting the other
mailing list users and harming them -despite you consider his disease to
be something "enjoyable" (which I think is not)- is nothing laughable at
all.

And is not funny because it was something the user could not control so
finally, IIRC, he had to be banned and some of the of users started
signing their own posts :-/

Greetings,

--
Camaleón

--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org

Archive: http://lists.debian.org/joli7j$s0$1...@dough.gmane.org

[Indulekha]

On Sat, May 12, 2012 at 11:40:35AM +0000, Camaleón wrote:
> On Sat, 12 May 2012 12:21:01 +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
>
> > On Sat, 2012-05-12 at 10:02 +0000, Camaleón wrote:
> >> I don't know why is that you smile. For the people involved it was not
> >> funny at all :-(
> >
> > If you know about tics than it shouldn't be an issue.
>
> (...)
>
> Ralf, I don't know how to tell this with plain (and kind) words becasue
> you seem don't understanding nothing at all... from nothing.
>
> In a mailing list there is no "face to face" comunication, you only get
> mesages from a person that you don't know and you had no previous
> relation with and you are unaware of his real intentions... So, if a
> person starts sending posts impersonating you, insulting the other
> mailing list users and harming them -despite you consider his disease to
> be something "enjoyable" (which I think is not)- is nothing laughable at
> all.
>
> And is not funny because it was something the user could not control so
> finally, IIRC, he had to be banned and some of the of users started
> signing their own posts :-/
>

Tourette's doesn't compel people to send obscenities via email, it's
just verbal and gestures. You got trolled.

--
♫ ❤ ♫ ❤ ♫ ❤
Indulekha

--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org

Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120512115929.GA1398@radhesyama

[Brad Rogers]

On Sat, 12 May 2012 11:46:26 +0000 (UTC)
Camaleón <noel...@gmail.com> wrote:

Hello Camaleón,

> I received first the "second" message (his reply to himself) and
> because he removed the name of the person who wrote the cited text,
> the message was unreferenced at all.

Without attribution, context and what-not, it was difficult to know
who/what Ralf was talking about, true.

Lacking the post it was a reply to, my MUA used the next available ref
header to thread the message; yours. It certainly made for an
interesting few minutes until the /real/ post it was following up came
through.

Mind you, we're getting off topic here....

--
Regards _
/ ) "The blindingly obvious is
/ _)rad never immediately apparent"

Where will you be when the bodies burn?
The Gasman Cometh - Crass

[Camaleón]

On Sat, 12 May 2012 06:59:29 -0500, Indulekha wrote:

> On Sat, May 12, 2012 at 11:40:35AM +0000, Camaleón wrote:
>> On Sat, 12 May 2012 12:21:01 +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
>>
>> > On Sat, 2012-05-12 at 10:02 +0000, Camaleón wrote:
>> >> I don't know why is that you smile. For the people involved it was
>> >> not funny at all :-(
>> >
>> > If you know about tics than it shouldn't be an issue.
>>
>> (...)

>> And is not funny because it was something the user could not control so
>> finally, IIRC, he had to be banned and some of the of users started
>> signing their own posts :-/
>>
>>
> Tourette's doesn't compel people to send obscenities via email, it's
> just verbal and gestures. You got trolled.

You're completely wrong.

But you can read and learn (from Wikipedia article):

***
"(...) Tourette's was once considered a rare and bizarre syndrome, most
often associated with the exclamation of obscene words or socially
inappropriate and derogatory remarks (coprolalia), but this symptom is
present in only a small minority of people with Tourette's.[1]"
***

Greetings,

--
Camaleón

--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org

Archive: http://lists.debian.org/jolke6$s0$1...@dough.gmane.org

[Roger Leigh]

On Sat, May 12, 2012 at 06:59:29AM -0500, Indulekha wrote:
>
> Tourette's doesn't compel people to send obscenities via email, it's
> just verbal and gestures. You got trolled.

Please take this off-list. It's off-topic and adds zero value to
the intended purpose of this list.


Thanks,
Roger

--
.''`. Roger Leigh
: :' : Debian GNU/Linux http://people.debian.org/~rleigh/
`. `' schroot and sbuild http://alioth.debian.org/projects/buildd-tools
`- GPG Public Key F33D 281D 470A B443 6756 147C 07B3 C8BC 4083 E800

--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org

Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120512123...@codelibre.net

[Wayne Topa]

On 05/12/2012 08:36 AM, Roger Leigh wrote:
> On Sat, May 12, 2012 at 06:59:29AM -0500, Indulekha wrote:
>>
>> Tourette's doesn't compel people to send obscenities via email, it's
>> just verbal and gestures. You got trolled.
>
> Please take this off-list. It's off-topic and adds zero value to
> the intended purpose of this list.

+1

--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org

Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4FAE5B71...@gmail.com

[Indulekha]

On Sat, May 12, 2012 at 12:18:14PM +0000, Camaleón wrote:
> On Sat, 12 May 2012 06:59:29 -0500, Indulekha wrote:
>
> > On Sat, May 12, 2012 at 11:40:35AM +0000, Camaleón wrote:
> >> On Sat, 12 May 2012 12:21:01 +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> >>
> >> > On Sat, 2012-05-12 at 10:02 +0000, Camaleón wrote:
> >> >> I don't know why is that you smile. For the people involved it was
> >> >> not funny at all :-(
> >> >
> >> > If you know about tics than it shouldn't be an issue.
> >>
> >> (...)
> >> And is not funny because it was something the user could not control so
> >> finally, IIRC, he had to be banned and some of the of users started
> >> signing their own posts :-/
> >>
> >>
> > Tourette's doesn't compel people to send obscenities via email, it's
> > just verbal and gestures. You got trolled.
>
> You're completely wrong.
>
> But you can read and learn (from Wikipedia article):
>
> ***
> "(...) Tourette's was once considered a rare and bizarre syndrome, most
> often associated with the exclamation of obscene words or socially
> inappropriate and derogatory remarks (coprolalia), but this symptom is
> present in only a small minority of people with Tourette's.[1]"
> ***

What, so now the *lack* of a described symptom is proof it exists?
Nowhere in that article does it say that Tourette's makes people
write obscenities. And that's with good reason, because it doesn't.

--
❤ ♫ ❤ ♫ ❤ ♫ ❤
Indulekha

--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org

Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120512140704.GB3308@radhesyama

[Ralf Mardorf]

On Sat, 2012-05-12 at 06:28 -0500, Indulekha wrote:
> Ah, ok. Yes, I do see it now.
> Apologies to Ralf!

No problem, I've got to apologize, since I wrote to much unneeded text.

--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org

Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1336831121.2121.47.camel@precise

[Camaleón]

On Sat, 12 May 2012 09:07:04 -0500, Indulekha wrote:

> On Sat, May 12, 2012 at 12:18:14PM +0000, Camaleón wrote:

>> > Tourette's doesn't compel people to send obscenities via email, it's
>> > just verbal and gestures. You got trolled.
>>
>> You're completely wrong.
>>
>> But you can read and learn (from Wikipedia article):
>>
>> ***
>> "(...) Tourette's was once considered a rare and bizarre syndrome, most
>> often associated with the exclamation of obscene words or socially
>> inappropriate and derogatory remarks (coprolalia), but this symptom is
>> present in only a small minority of people with Tourette's.[1]" ***
>
> What, so now the *lack* of a described symptom is proof it exists?
> Nowhere in that article does it say that Tourette's makes people write
> obscenities. And that's with good reason, because it doesn't.

Indulekha, I won't explain about what a disease is or isn't. Should you
are insterested in knowing more about this specific illness then go, read
and taught yourself, this is not a medical list.

But if you are pretending to explain to me what's what I lived *in first
person* with that guy, well, that's going too far and a bit arrogant from
your part, man...

Greetings,

--
Camaleón

--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org

Archive: http://lists.debian.org/jolsef$s0$1...@dough.gmane.org

[Roger Leigh]

On Sat, May 12, 2012 at 09:07:04AM -0500, Indulekha wrote:
> What, so now the *lack* of a described symptom is proof it exists?
> Nowhere in that article does it say that Tourette's makes people
> write obscenities. And that's with good reason, because it doesn't.

*Please*, take this offtopic garbage off list. Not only is it
offtopic, it's also rude and inconsiderate to the other subscribers
of this list. The list is for users of Debian, for discussion and
support of Debian. It's not for random topics outside that scope.
You're certainly not the only one guilty of taking this discussion
way offtopic, but you're certainly the worst example, and enough is
enough.

I won't be asking a third time, I'll be asking the listmaster to take
the appropriate action.

Roger

--
.''`. Roger Leigh
: :' : Debian GNU/Linux http://people.debian.org/~rleigh/
`. `' schroot and sbuild http://alioth.debian.org/projects/buildd-tools
`- GPG Public Key F33D 281D 470A B443 6756 147C 07B3 C8BC 4083 E800

--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org

Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120512143...@codelibre.net