RE: Quote from Kashpureff / Re: question about per. hack

Please, please, take this bilge off of the NANOG list. This is
not the place for techno-politico-socio-net-policy discussions.
Work it out in the undergraduate lounge, and get back to us
with the answer.

Tom

Ok. I've had it.

Perhaps the thread has drifted off topic. But get off your goddamned
high horse and save us the snotty rejoinders, all right?

And this goes for _all_ y'all.

Cheers,
-- jr 'who died and left _you_ a net.god?' a

NANOG list maintainers:

Please consider this a formal request to moderate this list.

The signal/noise ratio is horrible as it is, and continuing
to ignore off-topic posts, such as the thread on DNS policy,
is compounding the issue.

I would appreciate a response on this issue asap.

Otherwise, I would fully expect to see an exodus of list
participants who can no longer tolerate noise.

- paul

Paul Ferguson wrote:

NANOG list maintainers:

Please consider this a formal request to moderate this list.

The signal/noise ratio is horrible as it is, and continuing
to ignore off-topic posts, such as the thread on DNS policy,
is compounding the issue.

I would appreciate a response on this issue asap.

Otherwise, I would fully expect to see an exodus of list
participants who can no longer tolerate noise.

- paul

>
>Perhaps the thread has drifted off topic. But get off your goddamned
>high horse and save us the snotty rejoinders, all right?
>

Thank you for the intervention Paul.

Gentlemen:

I didn't start the thread everyone is complaining about. But, in
absence of a formal announcement of what is and is not on-topic on this
mailing list, _which I still haven't seen, after 4 explicit requests_,
I completely agree: a solution needs to be found.

The high-handedness with which the conversations have been handled of
late is, however not conducive to finding a solution, and will
ultimately cause those with valid topics to discus-- including the
opertaional aspects of DNS spoofing, and how to avoid it... _and_ how
to fix it, which is surely an operational topic, and is not a
conversation with a short term focus by nature--to decide that the
NANOG mailing list is a useless old-boy network, and replace it with
something that suits the needs of those individuals.

If you don't like the signal to noise ratio, by all means:

DEFINE SIGNAL.

Cheers,
-- jra

I didn't start the thread everyone is complaining about. But, in

No one cares.

absence of a formal announcement of what is and is not on-topic on this
mailing list, _which I still haven't seen, after 4 explicit requests_,

http://www.nanog.org/aup.html

pbd

> I didn't start the thread everyone is complaining about. But, in

No one cares.

Incredibly polite and mature, Mr. Dunn.

> absence of a formal announcement of what is and is not on-topic on this
> mailing list, _which I still haven't seen, after 4 explicit requests_,

http://www.nanog.org/aup.html

If you haven't seen the aup then you haven't been on NANOG long enough,
and if that's the case then you certainly shouldn't be pontificating on
what is or is not on topic.

Visit www.nanog.org. I'm sure you'll find the AUP there.

My, _my_, but nobody is listening this week.

I've read the AUP and the charter.

Many times.

Every time someone mentions them, in fact; to see if perhaps they've
changed.

Anyone who thinks that the AUP specifically addresses any of the
threads it's been mentioned to quash in the last 14 days apparently
speaks a different version of English than I do.

I asked for clarification, none was forthcoming.

I give up. Have fun, boys.

Oh, and Mr. Gaudet? I've been in, on, and around the net for about 13
years now. I'll keep my own counsel on what opinions to have, and when
and where to express them. It seems to have worked pretty well most of
those 13 years.

Please see rule numbers 4 and 6 of the AUP at
<http://www.nanog.org/aup.html>. You will note that my message to you was
in private email and was in no way CC'd to NANOG. You will also note that
I in no way said you were new to the net, I just inferred you are new to
NANOG. Your statements are contradictory, if you read [the aup] "every
time someone mentions them" then you do not need to ask its location;
which is what prompted me to send you private email in the first place.

Please spare the rest of the list and respect the reply-to on this
message.

Dean