can all current nanog threads move to nanog-ot@ plz?

here's how it looks just before i hit the "catch up" button.

   [ 23: mailman-owner@nanog.] nanog.org mailing list memberships reminder
   [ 90: "James Hess" ] Re: DNS and potential energy
       < 155: Marshall Eubanks >
           [ 22: John Levine ]
       < 35: "Jay R. Ashworth" >
       < 119: Rob Pickering >
       < 21: Tony Finch >
Y -[ 82: Jeroen Massar ] REJECT-ON-SMTP-DATA (Re: Mail Server best practices - was: Pandora's
   [ 15: Roland Perry ] Re: what problem are we solving? (was Re: ICANN opens
   [ 10: Roland Perry ] Re: what problem are we solving? (was Re: ICANN opens up
   [ 12: Stephane Bortzmeyer ] Re: ICANN opens up Pandora's Box of new TLDs
       < 23: Tony Finch >
       < 50: Phil Regnauld >
   [ 36: David Conrad ] TLDs and file extensions (Re: DNS and potential energy)
Y - [ 30: michael.dillon@bt.co]
   [ 31: "Jay R. Ashworth" ] Re: what problem are we solving? (was Re: ICANN opens up Pandora's
       [ 19: Joe Greco ]
   [ 135: "Jay R. Ashworth" ] RFC 1480 - does it generalize (was What Problem; was ICANN/Pandora)
   [ 60: Chris Owen ] Re: REJECT-ON-SMTP-DATA (Re: Mail Server best practices - was:
   [ 26: "Jay R. Ashworth" ] Re: Mail Server best practices - was: Pandora's Box of new TLDs

Paul Vixie wrote:

here's how it looks just before i hit the "catch up" button.

Damn! All that operational stuff on NANOG. Whodathunkit?!