RE: Proposed Resolution of Issue #318: REJECT

["Glen Zorn" <glenzorn@comcast.net>]

Alan DeKok [mailto:aland@deployingradius.com] writes:

> Glen Zorn wrote:
> ...
> >>> In fact I hold the idea in great esteem; what I disvalue is
> >>> the idea that data-driven models have to be implementable by
> >>> below-average high-school kids.
> ...
> > If you would be kind enough to read my comment, you will see that I
> said
> > nothing whatsoever about my colleagues, let alone anything insulting
> or
> > dismissive.
> 
>   Nonsense.  In case you had missed the major shift in software of the
> last 20 years, many world-class software products are written *without*
> a budget.  i.e. Open Source projects, among others.

Do you ever read what you write?  I really wish you would, since the rest of
us have to.  I didn't say anything about budgets.

> 
>   Your comments are insulting to me personally, and to any number of
> people whose customers demand something *other* than "what Glen wants".

My sincerest apologies to all those customers who demand limited and
simplistic designs.  I really had no idea.

> 
> >  The fact is, however,  (as Hannes has also pointed out) that
> > the processing model assumed in the Design Guidelines draft is
> simplistic
> > and limited, if not outright primitive.  If you wish to believe that
> that
> > fact makes the promoters of the model simplistic, limited and
> primitive as
> > well, that is your choice but I said nothing of the sort.
> 
>   Your statement was the equivalent of "have you stopped beating your
> wife yet".
> 
>   It's insulting, dismissed, and damned well *intended* to be insulting
> and dismissive.

Thank you for interpreting my intentions for me.  

> 
>   Alan DeKok.


--
to unsubscribe send a message to radiusext-request@ops.ietf.org with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://psg.com/lists/radiusext/>