Talk:DECAF

Hoax[edit]

Please provide evidence or at least sources that DECAF is a hoax as the article says. The provided source has no evidence for calling it fake, only that the DECAF developers [] revealed their creation as a publicity stunt, which is not the same thing. decafme.org itself says your copy of DECAF no longer works, so if they're not lying now it did work. My impression is that it was functional (or at least meant to be) and that the developers got scared into deactivating it by taking the server offline. It's easy to reactivate.--87.162.34.128 (talk) 14:49, 19 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If the authors say it is a hoax, and no one contradicts them, then there is no alternative than to consider it a hoax. https://datasecurityguy.wordpress.com/2009/12/19/decaf-was-a-hoaxspoof/ Don4of4 ^[Talk] 21:00, 26 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This "tool" was revealed to be a hoax, and has been undisputed as such for over six years. A web search for "DECAF Tool hoax" will reveal tens of reputable references. Don4of4 ^[Talk] 05:13, 26 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Don4of4:, do you think that the coverage would be heavy enough to warrant merging this into COFEE? Even if it's a hoax, if it was covered enough it might warrant a brief mention there as a joke/hoax. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 12:21, 26 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
For example, I found this mention in an academic text. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 12:25, 26 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I've re-written it and I figure that it'd be best served as a brief mention on the main page, but I'll wait before doing this. It is a hoax but it looks like it would be a somewhat notable one. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 12:43, 26 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Honestly, no, I do not think it is notable enough to merit having an additional page; that document you cited is not noteworthy. That said, I don't have an objection to this as long as the page is properly updated. Thank you! Don4of4 ^[Talk] 17:23, 26 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good - I'll just merge it into the main page. I'll admit, I don't entirely see where it would warrant its own page necessarily but it'd likely be worth a mention somewhere. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 04:25, 27 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Excellent, thank you for handling this matter! Don4of4 ^[Talk] 07:34, 27 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]