nanog mailing list archives
Perhaps it's time to think about enhancements to the NANOG list...?
From: Matthew Petach <mpetach () netflight com>
Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2021 15:28:31 -0700
On Thu, Mar 18, 2021 at 10:37 AM Tom Beecher <beecher () beecher cc> wrote:
CC back to the mailing list for visibility, since I ate the CC list. On Thu, Mar 18, 2021 at 1:31 PM Tom Beecher <beecher () beecher cc> wrote:Rod- Please refer to the usage guidelines found here. https://nanog.org/resources/usage-guidelines/ 14. Posts that encourage or facilitate an agreement about the followingsubjects are inappropriate: prices, discounts, or terms or conditions of sale; salaries; benefits, profits, profit margins, or cost data; market shares, sales territories, or markets; allocation of customers or territories; or selection, rejection, or termination of customers or suppliers.I would tend to agree that while most of your posts to the list are within the guidelines, there have been occasions where a reasonable person could think you might be skirting the line a bit. In this case : - Your company works as a broker to procure capacity for others. - You sent an email to the list that wording wise would be exactly the same as many of us might send to someone they were looking for capacity from. I think most would agree this is pretty clearly against both the usage guidelines and the spirit of what this mailing list is about. I would also like to remind you that this list is administered by the NANOG organization. You have no authority to tell others to 'cease and desist', and insult someone as 'underemployed' is also not well tolerated here. I have looped in the list admins here. It would probably be a good idea to refrain from future messages that are clearly commercial in nature, or that contain unnecessary insults.
If only we had some way to segregate out different topics of interest or disinterest, so that people who weren't interested in questions about bandwidth availability could unsubscribe from those topics, and only subscribe to the topics that *did* interest them... #AFewDaysTooEarly ^_^;; Matt
Current thread:
- Re: ASE - 100 Gig Wave, (continued)
- Re: ASE - 100 Gig Wave Rod Beck (Mar 18)
- Re: ASE - 100 Gig Wave JASON BOTHE via NANOG (Mar 18)
- Re: ASE - 100 Gig Wave Mark Tinka (Mar 18)
- Re: ASE - 100 Gig Wave Shane Ronan (Mar 18)
- Re: ASE - 100 Gig Wave Mike Hammett (Mar 18)
- Re: ASE - 100 Gig Wave sronan (Mar 18)
- Re: ASE - 100 Gig Wave William Herrin (Mar 18)
- Re: ASE - 100 Gig Wave Mark Tinka (Mar 18)
- Re: ASE - 100 Gig Wave sronan (Mar 18)
- Message not available
- Re: ASE - 100 Gig Wave Tom Beecher (Mar 18)
- Perhaps it's time to think about enhancements to the NANOG list...? Matthew Petach (Mar 18)
- Re: Perhaps it's time to think about enhancements to the NANOG list...? Eric Kuhnke (Mar 18)
- Re: Perhaps it's time to think about enhancements to the NANOG list...? Rod Beck (Mar 20)
- Re: Perhaps it's time to think about enhancements to the NANOG list...? Randy Bush (Mar 20)
- Re: Perhaps it's time to think about enhancements to the NANOG list...? Allen Kitchen (Mar 20)
- Re: Perhaps it's time to think about enhancements to the NANOG list...? Stan Barber (Mar 20)
- Re: Perhaps it's time to think about enhancements to the NANOG list...? Hank Nussbacher (Mar 20)
- Re: Perhaps it's time to think about enhancements to the NANOG list...? scott (Mar 20)
- Re: Perhaps it's time to think about enhancements to the NANOG list...? J. Hellenthal via NANOG (Mar 20)
- Re: Perhaps it's time to think about enhancements to the NANOG list...? Matthew Petach (Mar 20)
- Re: Perhaps it's time to think about enhancements to the NANOG list...? scott (Mar 20)