Show me the Money

[Rich Littleton]

Kurt,

I was glad to see your statement about excessive thin-skinned people.  I
wish you'd made this comment a couple of months ago.....

About James' proposal being just a thin-skinned reaction, I don't agree.
An audit is required.  That is not a "skin" issue.

Later,

Rich

______________________________________________________________________

*****  Unless stated otherwise, this message may be forwarded.  ******

On Wed, 27 Jan 1999, Kurt Cockrum wrote:

> In-Reply-To: <Pine.SUN.3.96.990126221219.23520A-100000 at scn>
> 
> James said:
> >[...]
> >	Another matter of concern was the treatment of volunteers.  In the
> >	past few year, we have had an excellent selection of volunteer
> >	committees.
> >	A committee that was really comes to mind, as far as excellence, was
> >	the fund-raising committee.  They were very competent, and these
> >	highly skilled volunteers drafted an exciting fund-raising proposal,
> >	presented it to the board to have it disappointingly dismissed.  After this discouragement, the committee disbanded.
> >[...]
> 
> I don't know why this spammish-looking thing was cc'ed to hardware and
> me, but here's what *my* money (only 2 copper-plated zinc slugs) looks
> like:
> 
> I've heard 2nd-hand rumors of this before, over the years.  The
> overwhelming impression I've gotten was that they were a bunch of
> high-flying thin-skinned prima-donnas who weren't willing to
> participate in the essentially iterative fine-tuning process, but
> instead flounced off in a high dudgeon after the first round, when
> their proposal didn't get the reception they were hoping for.  This
> makes me think they weren't really interested in the proposal per se,
> but were fishing for kudos and strokes, and left when it became
> apparent this wasn't immediately forthcoming, i. e. they were really
> spoiled brats.  In turn, this makes me think that their departure
> might've really been a Good Thing.  But maybe that's just me
> Being Negative(TM) :) .
> 
> If there were/are really any merits to the proposal, well, maybe it
> could be flown by the SCNA BOD once more.  After all, there's a whole
> new set of incumbents, right?  Of course, somebody kept a copy of the
> content, right? :)
> 
> James' .sig caught my eye:
> >[...]
> >PGP = Pretty Good Privacy    Coming Soon.
> >jamesr at scn.org               scn.org=Seattle community network
> 
> I sure hope you've read the PGP FAQ's on the topic of storing private
> keys on multi-user computers.  If you are serious about privacy and
> security, you must realize there's NO WAY a private key is going to
> STAY private on a public-access multi-user computer.  There doesn't
> seem to be a pgp executable in the usual scn PATHs, so I assume that
> hasn't yet been done.  Good.
> 
> Keep the private key on YOUR MACHINE ONLY.  Actually, it should be kept
> on a floppy, not ON the machine.  And use a "wipe" program after using
> PGP.  The PGP docs tell how to do this.  Of course, only you know how
> much security you need.  But it's imperative that YOU do all your
> homework, if you want to get the most out of PGP.  Otherwise, you may
> as well use rot13.  It's best if you build from source rather than run
> pre-packaged executables.  And follow the instructions to ensure that
> you have an authentic copy of PGP and not just an unofficial CALEA
> implementation :) .
> 
> Ordinarily I wouldn't say so much about this, but things seem to be
> getting so demand-driven these days that it seems nearly obligatory,
> sorry :( .
> --kurt
> 

* * * * * * * * * * * * * *  From the Listowner  * * * * * * * * * * * *
.	To unsubscribe from this list, send a message to:
majordomo at scn.org		In the body of the message, type:
unsubscribe scn
==== Messages posted on this list are also available on the web at: ====
* * * * * * *     http://www.scn.org/volunteers/scn-l/     * * * * * * *