Full Disclosure mailing list archives
RE: Important Notice about Security Watch Debate
From: "Keith Ward" <keith.ward () mcpmag com>
Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2004 15:18:35 -0800
The problem is that such an arrangement could go on and on -- Roberta responds back, you respond again, ad infinitum. I am making plans to get as many responses as possible published in some manner. But we're going to keep it to one response for the newsletter, since most newsletter readers aren't keen on reading pages and pages of content. -----Original Message----- From: James Bliss [mailto:james.bliss () comcast net] Sent: Thursday, February 12, 2004 6:13 PM To: Keith Ward; full-disclosure () lists netsys com Subject: Re: [Full-disclosure] Important Notice about Security Watch Debate
From your email it would appear that the 'battle lines' are already
drawn. Anyone submitting 'essays' may get them published and then Roberta Bragg's response to those essays is published. Will the parties submitting the essays then be provided guaranteed space to rebut Roberta's responses? In a truely open forum that would be allowed. Perhaps some good advice for you would be: 1) Learn how to program and how computers work (this does not include VBA scripts in an application, although script kiddies do like some of these). 2) Practice, research, test, keep your mind open. Implement truely scientific testing methodologies with no restrictions on what is tested or how. 3) Truthfully report what you learn with no preconceived notions or prejudices. Is that not what true journalistic integrity is about? On Thursday 12 February 2004 11:16, Keith Ward wrote:
Hi all, When I wrote my pitch for articles on Microsoft security, I didn't realize that Monday was President's Day, and a holiday for my company. As such, there will be no Security Watch newsletter going out Monday containing the essay for Roberta Bragg to respond to. It's totally my fault; I hadn't checked the calendar. We will instead be publishing the article two days later, on
Wednesday,
Feb. 18. Roberta's follow-up article will be published the following Monday, Feb. 23. My apologies for any inconvenience this change of schedule may cause. And thanks for the responses we've gotten thus far; by and large, they're terrific! I'm thinking of ways to get many of the commentaries published, since there have been so many excellent ones. I'd like to
get
all essays in by close of business tomorrow. Best, Keith Keith Ward Editor, Security Watch _______________________________________________ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html
_______________________________________________ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html
Current thread:
- Important Notice about Security Watch Debate Keith Ward (Feb 12)
- Re: Important Notice about Security Watch Debate James Bliss (Feb 12)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- RE: Important Notice about Security Watch Debate Keith Ward (Feb 13)