nanog mailing list archives
Re: Tauzin-Dingell (was ICANN)
From: Mike Joseph <mjoseph () netaxs com>
Date: Tue, 5 Mar 2002 17:35:02 -0500 (EST)
On Tue, 5 Mar 2002, Richard A Steenbergen wrote:
On Tue, Mar 05, 2002 at 03:21:06PM -0500, William Allen Simpson wrote:[...] much ranting deleted http://www.rivers4congress.com/Am I the only one who is uncomfortable with turning NANOG into a political tirade? Opposing legislation is one thing, turning it into an opportunity to elect your favorite candidate is another.
I agree. I think that NANOG is in no way the appropriate forum for discussion of a particular candidate. I do, however, feel that those in our industry need to be more politically active, especially with regard to legislation such as this. In fact, Mr. Simpson may have a good idea about the formation of ISP political lobby, but NANOG shouldn't be it. -Mike
Current thread:
- Re: Tauzin-Dingell (was ICANN), (continued)
- Re: Tauzin-Dingell (was ICANN) William Allen Simpson (Mar 05)
- Re: Tauzin-Dingell (was ICANN) bcurnow (Mar 06)
- Re: Tauzin-Dingell (was ICANN) Robert Cannon (Mar 06)
- Re: Tauzin-Dingell (was ICANN) William Allen Simpson (Mar 07)
- Re: Tauzin-Dingell (was ICANN) Eliot Lear (Mar 07)
- Re: Tauzin-Dingell (was ICANN) Jeff Mcadams (Mar 07)
- Re: Tauzin-Dingell (was ICANN) E.B. Dreger (Mar 07)
- Re: Tauzin-Dingell (was ICANN) William Allen Simpson (Mar 07)
- Re: Tauzin-Dingell (was ICANN) bcurnow (Mar 06)
- Re: Tauzin-Dingell (was ICANN) deeann mikula (Mar 07)
- Re: Tauzin-Dingell (was ICANN) William Allen Simpson (Mar 05)
- Re: Tauzin-Dingell (was ICANN) Mike Joseph (Mar 05)