NANOG-futures

[Gadi Evron]

On Fri, 22 Sep 2006, Robert E. Seastrom wrote:
> 
> Gadi Evron <ge@linuxbox.org> writes:
> 
> > On Fri, 22 Sep 2006, Robert E.Seastrom wrote:
> >> 
> >> Gadi Evron <ge@linuxbox.org> writes:
> >> 
> >> > I intend to keep doing so, on botnets especially when I believe there is a
> >> > situation that warrants it, unless told otherwise as a policy of the
> >> > mailing list. As long as there is interest anyway.
> >> 
> >> Email asking nicely on behalf of the mailing list committee after
> >> internal discussion that you cease and desist wasn't good enough, eh?
> >
> > Specify what is not to be discussed. Last time around it was DNS, yet it
> > was declared on topic.
> >
> > Make up your minds.
> 
> Yes, it is true we have asked multiple times, which sort of speaks for
> itself, doesn't it?

Wrong. You asked once when it was about DNS. Then mentioned on-list it was
on-topic. Whenever the NANOG admins declare something on or off topic, or
any thing decision, I follow it.

Maybe you are stuck on IRC too much, kicking whatever annoys you is
acceptable and good, there. Here, communities evolve. Let them or get out
of the way. If you can't let them, and you can't get out of the way - then
declare what is on topic clearly.

Otherwise, as long as there is clear interest, I intend to keep
participating on what may not interest you.

There are two issues here, how NANOG is run and allowed/disallowed to
evolve, and what will or will not be declared on or off topic, which I
will follow to the letter.

> 
>                                         ---Rob
> 
>