Outages mailing list

Don't forget to CC all the traffic to NANOG list.  Major
outages have
always been an important part of NANOG list traffic going
back to the
days when we were network techs, and are one main reason
that I'm a
subscriber here.  I have no intention of joining "yet
another list"
for the same information.

William Allen Simpson wrote:
> 
> Don't forget to CC all the traffic to NANOG list. 

Please don't do that. We don't need more pontification from
Gadi. This new 
separate list sounds like a great idea, if only because it
will distract him 
from NANOG-L. I don't post much but I read NANOG-L for the
operational content, 
and the off-topic posts generated by Gadi and his
supporters/detractors 
significantly reduce the SNR. I've been sending him private
emails asking him to 
stop polluting NANOG-L for some time, but those emails have
had no effect, nor 
have the numerous public requests posted to the list by
others. Hoping that 
another list will entice him away seems to be our only hope,
and forwarding that 
list here would defeat the purpose.

* from_nanogcorenap.com (Albert Meyer) [Thu 28 Sep 2006, 21:47
CEST]:
>William Allen Simpson wrote:
>>Don't forget to CC all the traffic to NANOG list. 
>Please don't do that. We don't need more pontification
from Gadi. This 
>new separate list sounds like a great idea, if only
because it will 
>distract him from NANOG-L. I don't post much but I read
NANOG-L for the 
>operational content, and the off-topic posts generated
by Gadi and his 
>supporters/detractors significantly reduce the SNR. I've
been sending 
>him private emails asking him to stop polluting NANOG-L
for some time, 
>but those emails have had no effect, nor have the
numerous public 
>requests posted to the list by others. Hoping that
another list will 
>entice him away seems to be our only hope, and
forwarding that list here 
>would defeat the purpose.

Gadi's tactics in a nutshell:

1) develop a long-term habit of posting off-topic stuff to
nanog
2) get called on it repeatedly
3) challenge what's supposed to be "on-topic" for
the mailing list anyway
4) start a new mailing list in an attempt to take real
content away from nanog
5) ???
6) profit!

Don't fall for it, people.


	-- Niels.

On Fri, 29 Sep 2006 01:32:35 +0200, Niels Bakker said:
> Gadi's tactics in a nutshell:
> 
> 1) develop a long-term habit of posting off-topic stuff
to nanog
> 2) get called on it repeatedly

OK, for the purposes of this discussion, we'll postulate
that in fact,
the posting was indeed off-topic...

> 3) challenge what's supposed to be "on-topic"
for the mailing list anyway
> 4) start a new mailing list in an attempt to take real
content away from nanog

But if he takes the supposedly off-topic stuff away, what
"real" content
is he taking away?  You can't have it both ways.  If it's
sufficiently
"real" that you're concerned about it being taken
to a different list,
you shouldn't have labelled it off-topic earlier.

> Don't fall for it, people.

Don't fall for what?

Presumably, if you find you can't reach the outages list
because their
listserv has had an outage, you just come up on NANOG like
before?

On 9/29/06, Valdis.Kletnieksvt.edu
<Valdis.Kletnieksvt.edu> wrote:
> On Fri, 29 Sep 2006 01:32:35 +0200, Niels Bakker said:
> > Gadi's tactics in a nutshell:
> >
> > 1) develop a long-term habit of posting off-topic
stuff to nanog
> > 2) get called on it repeatedly
>
> OK, for the purposes of this discussion, we'll
postulate that in fact,
> the posting was indeed off-topic...
>
> > 3) challenge what's supposed to be
"on-topic" for the mailing list anyway
> > 4) start a new mailing list in an attempt to take
real content away from nanog
>
> But if he takes the supposedly off-topic stuff away,
what "real" content
> is he taking away?  You can't have it both ways.  If
it's sufficiently
> "real" that you're concerned about it being
taken to a different list,
> you shouldn't have labelled it off-topic earlier.
>
> > Don't fall for it, people.
>
> Don't fall for what?
>
>
>
>

Alexander Harrowell wrote:

> 
> Presumably, if you find you can't reach the outages
list because their
> listserv has had an outage, you just come up on NANOG
like before?

Please, let's not do this one again. I can't imagine what
this profits 
anyone. Let this be the last post, resist the temptation to
put in your 
two cents worth, and just let it be.

-- 
Creating consternation around boundary conditions
and then proposing artificial self-serving
"compromises"
is one of the oldest games there is on mailing lists,
going back pretty much to the invention of Usenet.

if folk need to discuss more gadiisms as opposed to ops
stuff, any 
chance it could move to -futures?

randy