You get high marks for your crumudgeon level.
However, if I have to point it out and lead you to it
like a child, then so be it.
If I was mistaken in thinking that the referenced article:
"Red Cross looks to IT for post-Katrina recovery"
http://www.computerworld.com/securitytopics/security/recovery/story/0,10801,104250,00.html
..would perhaps elicit some operational suggestions from the peanut
gallery on how to perhaps assist in this effort, or prhaps contribute
to the BellSouth issues, etc., then mea culpa.
Sniping certainly accomplishes nothing.
- ferg
I'll file that comment where it belongs -- in file 13.
If a major catastrophe, albeit more human than network-related
(although lots of network-related issues here, too), isn't on-topic,
than I fail to see what is.
North American Network Operations perhaps?
Talking about the impact to networks is on-topic, talking about steps
being taken to protect or restore networks is on-topic, talking about
networking infrastructure as it relates to the public communications
infrastructure is on-topic during an event like this.
Replying to idiotic slashdot articles asking really stupid questions is
not on topic. Telling the entire NANOG reader base that you like your POTS
line and will never switch to VoIP is not on topic. Technically speaking a
human tragedy isn't even on topic.
Like I said, it might be different if there was some actual insight being
provided here. If someone was talking about some specific data relating to
the reliability of the infrastructure or otherwise something OPERATIONAL
to talk about that would be one thing, but this is not operational, this
is simply chatter. Chatter has its place, that is why people read Slashdot
and watch the news, but replacing an operational mailing list with the
slashdot commentary section and seeing what happens is not my or anyone
else's idea of a good time.