Brands excluded from digicash beta

[Paul Robichaux]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

Paul, 

I appreciate your reply, especially the information that I can use to
reconstruct my account. I never received the mail that Branko
originally sent. Evidently no one received my repeated requests sent
after the first one.

> Sometimes we can react very fast, but alas this is only the case for 
> standard procedures which we did automate.  More specific questions 
> and requests *have* to be handled by humans.  We think the people who are 
> willing to invest quite some effort in setting up a shop for the beta 
> test, are very important participants in the beta test trail.  
> Therefore it seems *very* unlike to us that we didn't respond to *any*
> mail or request from you.  Not trusting our own memory ( we do receive more 
> than 100 (yes, hundred) mails on ecash *each* day, even Sundays) 
> we dove right in to it and found a trail of  DigiCash answers to your mail 
> with the subject: 'Concerns about ecash'.  

I was unclear in my original statement. You, Marcel, and others did
respond to my comments and questions-- specifically to my concerns
about when ecash systems would be available for real use. My upset
came from the fact that once my shop stopped working, I didn't get a
response.

> > Since then, an accident on my WWW server has rendered the e-shop
> > inoperable. I've asked Digicash, in the form of Paul Diniessen, for
> > help reconstructing the bank records. No go.

> Sorry we *did* sent you a respons within an hour from your 
> request by my colleague Branko. He is responsible for our bank in 
> the trial. His respons was:

> -The dbm library used by Linux and FreeBSD are different, so the ecash
> -databases are also incompatible.  If you have a password for getting an
> -initial balance, you can also use this password for reopening your
> -account (and keeping your old balance).  For the server at fairgate.com
> -account you can use the password ********  (pw made invisible PD) for this.
> -
> -Branko

> > > Of course, it may well be a matter of incompetence rather than insult,
> > > but the net result is the same.  The more I see of digicash's lack of
> > > consideration towards their potential customers and important figures like
> > > Brands the more I question whether they have the potential to succeed.
> > 
> > The more I deal with Digicash, the better First Virtual looks. My
> > technical preference is for using Brands or Chaum cash; at present,
> > though, there aren't any shipping Brands servers, and the Digicash
> > folks don't seem to be able to get all their socks in one bag.

> We feel somewhat troubled by these comments.  We strongly feel that 
> the alleged 'lack of consideration' as unjustified.  First we would 
> like to split up your comment in to two different issues, first 
> regarding our potential customers and secondly the issue of Mr. S. 
> Brands.

First of all, Hal Finney wrote the paragraph which mentions lack of
consideration. My own feelings toward Digicash-- which you confirm--
are that you have more work to do than you can presently handle. I
understand that; it's not uncommon, and I don't hold it against you.
It _does_ hamper my ability to set up services for which I can be paid.

> We like you to consider this phase in the existence of ecash as a 
> genuin beta trail.  In beta test not only software is being trailed 
> but the supporting services too!  However, it should be noted that we 
> did respond to your mail and requests. 

This is a good point. I do understand that this is a beta test, and
that problems will occur. I also want to confirm for other readers
that you did respond to my mail; in the most important case I didn't
get the response.

> We will give a call today to check if received this mail. We hope to 
> resolve the problems mentioned above and to continue our co-operation.

Thanks for your detailed response.

Regards,
- -Paul Robichaux

- -- 
Paul Robichaux, KD4JZG       | Good software engineering doesn't reduce the 
perobich at ingr.com            | amount of work you put into a product; it just 
Not speaking for Intergraph. | redistributes it differently.
		  ### http://www.intergraph.com ###

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2

iQCVAwUBLt9J/qfb4pLe9tolAQFABwP9FuFZvDeAzVlnFGqg5NwszbAoPN1IbV/2
SpD0bEdxbUkB+OdBCSkYgkcA0O/gU7MWFYNuJr062b8mwCBm5GLG8AGGq6dSYM+A
Tfdq/oi1F+yrkDcvq7t6TMfLcgiynylAfVqv1c8+SHrMxXtHDJ5hLlqvfJ43m09S
2nsZTGVd01s=
=rwxp
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----