1994-06-02 - Re: PGP 2.6 FAQ

Header Data

From: Richard Johnson <Richard.Johnson@Colorado.EDU>
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: 45400d2fe4c5745d6638bde952cca1ae9655f68858e75d42f2fbc21e501c5678
Message ID: <199406021858.MAA24832@spot.Colorado.EDU>
Reply To: <199406021700.SAA25323@an-teallach.com>
UTC Datetime: 1994-06-02 19:03:54 UTC
Raw Date: Thu, 2 Jun 94 12:03:54 PDT

Raw message

From: Richard Johnson <Richard.Johnson@Colorado.EDU>
Date: Thu, 2 Jun 94 12:03:54 PDT
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: PGP 2.6 FAQ
In-Reply-To: <199406021700.SAA25323@an-teallach.com>
Message-ID: <199406021858.MAA24832@spot.Colorado.EDU>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


  From the keyboard of:  gtoal@an-teallach.com (Graham Toal)

> Personally I don't
> rule out MIT internecine warfare and personal grudges.  University
> politics can get as dirty as the real thing at times, but I think
> we can rule out *real* politics in this.

"University politics is so vicious simply because there is so little at
stake." <-- reasonable accurate misquote

University politics are normally much dirtier than the real thing, and
much harder to stay out of if you spend more than 4 years at an
institution.  The battles over office space alone can make smear
campaigns via TV ads in a congressional race look like a friendly
debate.

Still, it seems from the outside that there wasn't much toe-stepping
going on at MIT with regard to their PGP release.  That's nice to see.
Perhaps, for once, the internal politics were calmer than the external
storm of paranoia?  :-)


Richard






Thread