nanog mailing list archives
Re: AUP for NANOG?
From: Edward Lewis <Ed.Lewis () neustar biz>
Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 11:32:45 -0400
At 7:48 -0700 4/14/05, Matthew Black wrote:
Do we have an Acceptable Usage Policy fot this NANOG mailing list?
http://nanog.org/aup.html I suspect that the question above is rather rhetorical, nevertheless.
Of late this forum has become a forum for ad hominem rather than a friendly discussion of technical issues.
I agree. IMHO, I don't place much credibility in what I learn via this list. I wish I could.
-- -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Edward Lewis +1-571-434-5468 NeuStar If you knew what I was thinking, you'd understand what I was saying.
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)
- Re: AUP for NANOG? Per Gregers Bilse (Apr 15)