> Most of your evidence was on private mailing lists: there's no way we
> could do that. (The word 'evidence isn't even really appropriate here.)
actually, pretty much nothing was. we explicitly showed you commits and corresponding
bugzilla/etc entries where the discrepancy should have at least raised a curious "yeah,
really, what's up with that?" and resulted in your asking further questions to the devs
themselves. and your reaction to that? let's see http://lwn.net/Articles/286405/ :
Mostly I'm not interested enough to bother people over it.
and *then* you still continued to attack the characters of people for *weeks* and even *now*
you keep arguing that truth is decided by who says it, not by the supporting facts. that's as
absurd and irrational as it can get.
> Thus all we really have to go on is the word and character of the
really, you *have* to? as if there were no alternative. you're just trying to explain your
behaviour instead of apologizing for it (ah yes, that's part of adulthood too, you know,
although you'll probably not find it in the dictionary that you seem to be so attached to).
as a final note i'd like to make an observation in that the most or even all voracious ad
hominem attacks came from anonymous posters such as yourselves. something to remind yourself
next time you divide the 'security people' into black and white categories as somewhere above
(i'm not into security by the way, just a web programmer).