NANOG-futures

[Martin Hannigan]

On Sat, Mar 15, 2008 at 10:51 PM, Simon Lyall <simon@darkmere.gen.nz> wrote:
> On Sat, 15 Mar 2008, Martin Hannigan wrote:
>
>
> > On Sat, Mar 15, 2008 at 10:26 AM, Patrick W. Gilmore <patrick@ianai.net> wrote:
>  > > On Mar 14, 2008, at 11:46 PM, Martin Hannigan wrote:
>  > >
>  > >  > There's no new charter, just SOP's. But yes, it is against the AUP.
>  > >  > Let me see if the authors of these valuable reports can fix that with
>  > >  > a BCC.
>  > >
>  > >  BCC'ing the other lists is still cross-posting.
>  >
>  > The intent IIRC to discourage threads across multiple lists of
>  > thousands and thousands of people. BCC would seem to be consistent
>  > with that intent.
>
>  In that case people filtering by using the "To: " header so the emails
>  would not be correctly filtered.

Subject: ? Is there some reason why it will be so horrible to change
your filter?

>  Also what exactly is the need to send 3 emails to several lists every week
>  when no discussion on them is expected (at least not on most of the
>  lists) ?

Speaking for this list, we do occasionally see discussion and
sometimes resolution based on that discussion. Is there some reason
that this report should not come to the list?

>  Another type of email that might be sent to several lists would be CFPs
>  for Network Organisation meetings.

Ok.


>  In any case the current policy doesn't reflect current practice so one or
>  both needs to be modified.

Feel free to propose some language to do that.

_______________________________________________
Nanog-futures mailing list
Nanog-futures@nanog.org
http://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog-futures