Comment by phendrenad2
5 years ago
Daniel was probably warned by many not to respond a second time, or maybe he thinks that this emailer is a crank who isn't worth responding to, but I kinda wish he would. The emailer is either experiencing the effects of curl exploits, and doing a bad job of explaining it, or is very confused about the role curl plays in exploits in general. I'm not willing to assume the latter, although I think that's the assumption most are making here.
Yeah I think a reply ignoring the threat and just explaining what Curl is would be the best approach here.
Either the person is just a crank and in that case no harm done, or the person has legitimately been affected by an exploit and at the very least it will inform them of what actually happened and how Curl isn't to blame at all.
I agree: it's a good way to handle angry people by taking it in a soft tone and explaining; it may have a positive impact on the person because someone cares, and if the person was just angry at the moment it may also help them learn something. I often tend to take some time to respond to such kind of angry messages though, you really need to make an effort on yourself to get back to a "kind" state of mind for it to work.