Re: ssl security desaster (was: Re: SSH keys: DSA vs RSA)
Peter Samuelson <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> Who is this "we"? Whose serious efforts? Who is investigating? Most
> importantly, should we assume that, as in the past, you, Mike Bird,
> intend to do nothing but talk?
I think this is a common stylistic choice. I consider myself part of
the Debian community, though I don't contribute very much directly.
When I post to Debian lists, I frequently use "we" as both a means of
building on an existing community feeling and occasionally to soften
criticism. I don't use it to claim credit. I assume Mike uses it the
same way. In the future, I'll keep in mind not to lump myself with
Debian developers, to avoid this sort of misunderstanding.
In that spirit, maybe YOU should all be more careful about YOUR
pronouns, too. After all, one of YOU, namely Thijs Kinkhorst,
followed up to Martin Uecker (one of US) with:
> You mean less likely than once in 15 years? We're open to your
Some of US (not YOU, just US) may have interpreted this not as
pointless sarcasm but as a genuine call for constructive criticism
from US. If YOU had meant to solicit just Martin's suggestions and
not to hear any suggestions from any of the rest of US, then YOU could
have been more clear in YOUR wording.
Thank YOU for YOUR continued work on Debian. Despite the occasional
misstep, WE appreciate YOUR efforts. If YOU ever *do* want to hear
any of OUR suggestions, WE'd be happy to share them, but please be
explicit when YOU ask, so WE don't embarrass OURselves again.
Kevin Buhr <email@example.com>