nanog mailing list archives
Re: Banned on NANOG
From: Bill Nash <billn () billn net>
Date: Sun, 5 Dec 2004 00:09:58 -0800 (PST)
On Sat, 4 Dec 2004, J.D. Falk wrote:
On 12/04/04, Patrick W Gilmore <patrick () ianai net> wrote:I also think that makes it nearly impossible to run a good, informative list. Certainly FAR more difficult than just leaving the list completely unmoderated. I do not believe anyone here would argue those points either (besides, obviously, the moderator herself)....who has been silent during this whole debate, which only serves to feed the flames (and the flamers) as we all make wild guesses regarding motive and intent.
My last email contained an explicit request for a responst. I expect to see one.
- billn
Current thread:
- Re: [OT] Re: Banned on NANOG, (continued)
- Re: [OT] Re: Banned on NANOG Richard Irving (Dec 04)
- Re: [OT] Re: Banned on NANOG Dan Hollis (Dec 04)
- Re: [OT] Re: Banned on NANOG nanog gonan (Dec 06)
- Re: [OT] Re: Banned on NANOG Bill Nash (Dec 04)
- Re: [OT] Re: Banned on NANOG Stephen Sprunk (Dec 04)
- Re: [OT] Re: Banned on NANOG Bill Nash (Dec 04)
- Re: [OT] Re: Banned on NANOG Daniel Golding (Dec 04)
- Re: [OT] Re: Banned on NANOG Suresh Ramasubramanian (Dec 04)
- Re: [OT] Re: Banned on NANOG Patrick W Gilmore (Dec 04)
- Re: Banned on NANOG J.D. Falk (Dec 04)
- Re: Banned on NANOG Bill Nash (Dec 04)
- Re: [OT] Re: Banned on NANOG Lou Katz (Dec 03)
- Re: [OT] Re: Banned on NANOG Bill Nash (Dec 03)
- RE: [OT] Re: Banned on NANOG Bill Nash (Dec 03)