Re: PGP protection

From: Randy Myers (rm_at_whoknows.org)
Date: 11/17/03

  • Next message: Sinister Midget: "Re: PGP protection" 
    Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 05:57:35 GMT

    You're not very good at this usenet thing yet are you?

    In alt.os.linux.slackware Sinister Midget <sm@sletom002.com> wrote:
    > Randy Myers blubbered effusively on Sun, 16 Nov 2003 at 06:06 GMT:

    > > In alt.os.linux.slackware Jim Richardson <warlock@eskimo.com> wrote:
    > >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    > >> Hash: SHA1
    > >
    > > pgp trash troll delete
    > >
    > >> You have been repeatedly asked to provide an example, of a post,
    > >> with pgp-sig in the headers. Yet you have failed to do so.
    > >
    > > You have been repeatedly asked why it is necessary to include pgp
    > > trash in this and other postings.

    > You have repeatedly been answered as well.

    > That you don't /care/ for the answers is of little concern to the
    > respondents. That they /did/ respond is all that matters.

    > Now, will you ask your sockpuppet to anwswer the question and to
    > provide an example of PGP/GPG signatures placed in headers?

  • Next message: Sinister Midget: "Re: PGP protection"

    Relevant Pages

    • Re: PGP protection
      ... pgp trash troll delete ... > | They simply need to put that information in their headers, ... you have no valid reason to use it. ... accede to our request is unreasonable. ...
      (comp.os.linux.misc)
    • Re: PGP protection
      ... > Hash: SHA1 ... pgp trash troll delete ... > with pgp-sig in the headers. ...
      (comp.os.linux.misc)