@On Mon, 1 Apr 1996, Sean Donelan wrote:
@> Is this just a case of bad reporting by Joanie Wexler at NetworkWorld? A
@> bad case of passing the buck by Alecia Cooper at Sprint? Or something else?
@It's most definitely something else. Most people are trained from birth
@that organizations with acronyms rule the world, thus NANOG and IEPG
@and ISOC must be the rulers of the Internet world.
Yes, as more people from various walks of life get involved in the Internet,
there is going to be confusion because these "new" people are going to
assume that there is something behind these fancy acronyms...
when they find out that the Internet is like a large "movie set" they may
get very upset...or at least disoriented...they will find that the net is not
an Information Superhighway but rather a parking lot with carnival rides...
...this will probably send many people BACK to their families, churches,
schools, governments, corner barber shops and neighbors to try to find
something "real" in their life...in this respect, the Internet may cause people
in local areas to become "better connected" because much of the net is
very socially disconnected...
...virtual is fun but when the rubber hits the road...people buy ($$$) real...
@Since most NANOG/IEPG/ISOC people are clueless when it comes to things
@like public relations, press releases, spin control, etc... is it any
@wonder that the press marches merrily off in their own direction.
I am not sure they are clueless, they may have just chosen to live in a
different world where the traditional press has little meaning....keep in
mind that Dolphins do not get involved much in the world of Cats and Dogs...
@There is actually opportunity here for groups like NANOG to have some
@influence and communicate with the public in a positive fashion. I
@suggest that a good first step would be to release a communique to the
@press after every NANOG meeting and a good second step would be to urge
@ISOC to spend more money on general educational issues to make people in
@general more aware of operational and architectural issues.
@Michael Dillon Voice: +1-604-546-8022
Maybe people that live largely in the Internet (and other places) are going to
discover what the other 99% of the people on planet earth already know....
In order to get people working in a common direction you have to have some
common purpose, some common goals and a reason and benefit for an individual
to be associatted with an entity.
Having a short, catchy acronym is not enough. Most humans do not join clubs
or help promote a cause simply because it exists. One or more of the basic
human motivators need to be in place. (education, money, power, entertainment,
self-fullfillment, social status, peer acceptance, pleasure, etc.)
The Internet is currently going through a transition...many of the traditional groups
that have been formed in the "real world" (whatever that is) are moving some or
part of their member communication to the Internet. Most of it shows up in the
World Wide Web...little by little, traditional groups will discover some of the
other "services" available on the net. When this occurs these groups will likely
overshadow the tiny groups that helped to build the net.
I suggest that "net people" give up on the idea of building more and more "movie sets"
and instead, join with the real people and help facilitate their increased involvement
with the net. This involvement is inevitable and as they say..."If you can't beat them...
join them"...By joining with existing groups, netizens can have a significant impact
on how those groups merge into the increasing traffic on the Information Parking Lot...