From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Perry E. Metzger" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Bug#766395: emacs/gnus: Uses s_client to for SSL. Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2014 23:06:14 -0400 Message-ID: <20141028230614.52b4f9a0@jabberwock.cb.piermont.com> References: <20141022193441.GA11872@roeckx.be> <87zjcnj2k6.fsf@trouble.defaultvalue.org> <87mw8mzmxj.fsf@mid.deneb.enyo.de> <20141023143702.3897e618@jabberwock.cb.piermont.com> <8761fazkx7.fsf@mid.deneb.enyo.de> <20141023145721.12ed0820@jabberwock.cb.piermont.com> <87vbnay5lf.fsf@mid.deneb.enyo.de> <20141023154223.45f2c9eb@jabberwock.cb.piermont.com> <874muuihjh.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <20141023230048.13f8234a@jabberwock.cb.piermont.com> <87wq7pgpif.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <20141024171421.78720abe@jabberwock.cb.piermont.com> <87r3xxgmx2.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <20141024204202.276dbb1f@jabberwock.cb.piermont.com> <8738a95t6b.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <20141027153954.08930677@jabberwock.cb.piermont.com> <87lho04qvn.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <20141028111032.19366491@jabberwock.cb.piermont.com> <87a94f4naw.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1414552005 28813 80.91.229.3 (29 Oct 2014 03:06:45 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2014 03:06:45 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Florian Weimer , rms@gnu.org, kurt@roeckx.be, Rob Browning , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: "Stephen J. Turnbull" Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Oct 29 04:06:37 2014 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1XjJan-0002LJ-IN for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 29 Oct 2014 04:06:37 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:42406 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XjJam-0007IC-LJ for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 28 Oct 2014 23:06:36 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:54225) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XjJaW-0007I4-UZ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 28 Oct 2014 23:06:22 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XjJaR-0006rX-MK for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 28 Oct 2014 23:06:20 -0400 Original-Received: from hacklheber.piermont.com ([2001:470:30:84:e276:63ff:fe62:3400]:34302) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XjJaR-0006rH-I2; Tue, 28 Oct 2014 23:06:15 -0400 Original-Received: from snark.cb.piermont.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by hacklheber.piermont.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B90B01433; Tue, 28 Oct 2014 23:06:14 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: from jabberwock.cb.piermont.com (jabberwock.cb.piermont.com [10.160.2.107]) by snark.cb.piermont.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 730322DE084; Tue, 28 Oct 2014 23:06:14 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <87a94f4naw.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.10.1 (GTK+ 2.24.25; x86_64-apple-darwin14.0.0) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 3.x X-Received-From: 2001:470:30:84:e276:63ff:fe62:3400 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:175960 Archived-At: On Wed, 29 Oct 2014 11:33:43 +0900 "Stephen J. Turnbull" wrote: > Perry E. Metzger writes: > > > Name calling is pretty much always a bad idea in a rational > > discussion. It adds nothing. Defending it as though it were some > > valid form of argumentation is ridiculous. > > OK. Have some valid argumentation: > > So far I have seen "Perry E. Metzger " > advocate nothing but extreme positions, Wait, so you're actually doing argumentum ad hominem now? "We can't believe these arguments because a bad person argues them"? Really? FYI, lists of logical fallacies aren't bingo cards. The idea is to avoid all of them, not to try to hit them all. > All OK now, right? No. > N.B. As you have probably recognized, the above is argument ad > hominem, Yes, and thus it is not valid argumentation. Perry -- Perry E. Metzger perry@piermont.com