[cryptome] Re: [cryptome]

[Michael Best]

You can read through the emails for yourself, no doubt. Start with the
original email about the GCHQ slide with redacted IPs, where I ask for
verification/validation.

On Sat, Oct 10, 2015 at 6:55 AM, Cari Machet <carimachet at gmail.com> wrote:

> Show me the email where you called for help ... i have been traveling
> heavy so missed it
>
> The type of work of forensics research is important and how ot is
> conducted is as well
>
> Its not about my personal stamp of approval it is about community and
> respecting of and embodiment of the community
>
> If anyone including john is being a fucker we need to account for that
> On Oct 10, 2015 12:04 PM, "Michael Best" <themikebest at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> The list had been involved since the first post about the GCHQ slide. The
>> list was no help at all.
>>
>> Sorry you don't approve, Cari, but what's done is done. The list was
>> consulted and no help. John Young refused to acknowledge the problem - *or
>> fix it. *[sarcasm] But what's terribly wrong is that I reported it -
>> *not* that John leaked it or lied it about it when he kept denying it or
>> anything else. [/sarcasm]
>>
>>
>>> *Cari Machet* carimachet at gmail.com
>>>
>>> <carimachet%40gmail.com?Subject=Re%3A%20%5Bcryptome%5D%20Re%3A%20%5Bcryptome%5D&In-Reply-To=%3CCAGRDzQX8MeKa3DuwLaNpW-jfTneECwos-oXhSxo0iCb5V%2BGsHA%40mail.gmail.com%3E>
>>> *Sat Oct 10 04:51:59 EDT 2015*Still michael best you could have
>>> consulted the list here That someone calls you a liar therefor you act is
>>> an ego based mindset Answer why you decided to not consult this list that
>>> has profoundly smart
>>> beings on it You could have asked this list for help we are interested
>>> in helping with
>>> such matters i would say and you could have done so without revealing
>>> info
>>> ... did this never cross your mind ? If it never even crossed your mind
>>> to consult us i find there is something
>>> terribly wrong
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Oct 10, 2015 at 12:01 AM, coderman <coderman at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 10/9/15, Michael Best <themikebest at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> > ... *they never would've been published. *
>>>
>>> i find it useful to think of voice. published yes, with little voice.
>>>
>>> now it's most certainly a loud something!
>>>   the published always was, however...
>>>
>>
>>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: text/html
Size: 3794 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.cpunks.org/pipermail/cypherpunks/attachments/20151010/2985cad4/attachment-0002.txt>