nanog mailing list archives
AUP for NANOG?
From: "Matthew Black" <black () csulb edu>
Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 07:48:42 -0700
Do we have an Acceptable Usage Policy fot this NANOG mailing list? Of late this forum has become a forum for ad hominem rather than a friendly discussion of technical issues. While I may disagree with the opinions of others, I wouldn't resort to name calling or belittling. This reminds me of the way others behaved when I entered the field some 25 years ago. Some people were very helpful and friendly. Others responded very arrogantly with the tone of "how stupid you are for asking that question." If you're so smart, feel free to share your knowledge. It's unnecessary to belittle someone for asking a question or stating an opinion. The motivation behind this post is to serve as a reminder of the purpose of the NANOG forum. Let's return some decorum here. matthew black california state university, long beach
Current thread:
- AUP for NANOG? Matthew Black (Apr 14)
- Re: AUP for NANOG? Randy Bush (Apr 14)
- Re: AUP for NANOG? Edward Lewis (Apr 14)
- Re: AUP for NANOG? Chris Kuethe (Apr 14)
- Re: AUP for NANOG? Randy Bush (Apr 14)
- Re: AUP for NANOG? Romain Komorn (Apr 14)
- Re: AUP for NANOG? Scott Grayban (Apr 14)
- Re: AUP for NANOG? Bill Nash (Apr 14)
- Re: AUP for NANOG? Steve Gibbard (Apr 14)
- Message not available
- Best Practices Knowledge Capture (was: Re: AUP for NANOG?) Jay R. Ashworth (Apr 15)
- Re: AUP for NANOG? Randy Bush (Apr 14)
- Comment for new folks and posting [was: AUP for NANOG?] Scott Weeks (Apr 14)