Subject: Re: internet voting -- ICANN, SmartInitiatives, etc.

From: Vernon Schryver <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 14 Jan 2001 18:52:05 -0700 (MST)

What is it about the IETF list that draws people who demonstrate
disinterest in the common meanings of our jargon (e.g. "bug," "denial
of service," "digital," and "analog") but nevertheless try to sell us
technology** using those words?

For example, if Mr. Gerck understood "bug" or "database" as most of us
do, he wouldn't talk about a "database paradigm" as a panacea against
bugs.  He would know that the phrase "database paradigm" is quite
evocative, but not in a good way.  If he meant familiar things by "digital"
and "analog," he wouldn't have said that making a hole in card stock is
analog but touching a keyboard or touch sensitive screen is digital.  If
he were familiar with analog computers, he would not have said that only
digital computers have "steps."  If he knew what denial of service attacks
are, I hope he would not have claimed to have demonstrated a complete
defense against them.  If hew knew what the open source movement is about
and sympathized with it, it should have been possible to decide from his
statements if he intends to offer free licenses for his patents or if he
is using similar but different words in the hope of selling to people who
know only that "open source" is an up and coming buzz word.  Or perhaps
he is among those who think "open source" is a magic phrase that compels
programmers to provide free code reviews, debugging, and enhancements to
purely proprietary systems.  If he were selling anything I'd want to buy,
he would not have equated the effects of bugs in paper ballot counting
software with the effects of bugs in completely computerized voting
systems.

In other words, what can be done to convince Mr. Gerck to stop flooding
the IETF list with his advertising and to join Mr. Flemming, Mr. Allisat,
and others who are working on IPv8 and other leading edge technologies**?
I fear that as long as he continues to get little worse than a lukewarm
reception here, M.r Gerck will continue to try elicit responses and
that he will report them elsewhere as endorsements.

Vernon Schryver    [email-masked]

** by the T word, I mean its primary modern meaning, which is unrelated
 to its old meaning.

---

From: Ed Gerck <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 14 Jan 2001 20:09:33 -0800

Vernon Schryver wrote:

> analog but touching a keyboard or touch sensitive screen is digital.

I never said what you wrote above.  In fact, I might say that you got it
reversed in your last phrase.  And in everything else.

But, the subject in this thread was what the IETF was doing in terms of
Internet voting protocols.  Attacking me, personally, will not make this
thread more interesting, I believe.

If we want to use public discussions to mine the gold of truth, then I think
that calcite and rhyolite must not be not all that we can get ;-)

Cheers,

Ed Gerck