Wake up people, you are falling into the same old theistic behavior that we all as evolved sentient beings should eschew, neigh, …loathe. INFOSEC is not a religion and YOU are not the FUCKING POPE ok?
That’s a quote from Krypt3ia on his blog entitled “Infosec is not a religion”. He says this in his rant about the use of the term “evangelist” in security.
Krypt3ia is even nice enough to define the term for us. Now I know Krypt3ia is smart enough to know that a term can be used creatively so that it does not fall into the traditional use of the term. But his obvious hatred of religion (displayed by the quote above) doesn’t allow him to get around this, and it is unfortunate.
Is the term overused? Yes, I think it is. That is why I chose the title “Advocate” instead (thanks to Michael Santarcangelo for the help with the title). Has it turned into a buzzword or sorts? Maybe. But should people who have the title of evangelist be ashamed somehow? No, they shouldn’t. Should people who “take” that title for themselves be ashamed? No. It might be a little corny to take it for yourself, but it is not something to be ashamed of.
If someone is using the term “improperly to suit your needs of being center stage and telling everyone from the fucking mount what “they” should be doing” as Krypt3ia says, then why is he throwing his bile against only this term? Plenty of people put themselves forward as experts who are far from it, and they don’t always call themselves evangelists. Plenty of people want center stage (I’m not immune to that, and I’m pretty sure Krypt3ia is not immune either if his diatribes are any indication).
This is really just a case of projection. Krypt3ia doesn’t like religion, and he can’t stand to see the term used so much. It irritates him, so he blows up (he does that a lot, which is part of his charm). And while my use of the term “psychological projection” is not an exact fit for the clinical definition, I think I can use it here to fit my desired message, which is: Get a grip dude. It is just a term.