1997-10-04 - Re: Stronghold

Header Data

From: John Young <jya@pipeline.com>
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: 3330e31a02cb42daa52309ac3a63bc6472f34295a417cd25426a0871848a1805
Message ID: <1.5.4.32.19971004170309.006e6f6c@pop.pipeline.com>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1997-10-04 17:28:50 UTC
Raw Date: Sun, 5 Oct 1997 01:28:50 +0800

Raw message

From: John Young <jya@pipeline.com>
Date: Sun, 5 Oct 1997 01:28:50 +0800
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: Stronghold
Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19971004170309.006e6f6c@pop.pipeline.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



Dimitri Vulis reposted parts of the Stronghold/censorship 
drama:

Dimitri: 

This replay continues your artful distortion of the exchanges, 
presumbly to make your best case, yet it still fails to explain
your original beef with Stronghold.

Perhaps this is unfair, but it now appears that you are using 
the disputed censorship issue to cloud your reluctance, or 
inability, to substantiate a fault in Stronghold.

Send me the Stronghold fault, I'll be happy to add it to the 
other crypto-security stuff that wasn't supposed to be published.

This is not meant to defuse the censorship matter, that's still
live ammo.







Thread