> Personally, I have a hard time understanding much of the > opposition to including real names along with one's handle - > yes, future employers may look at the assorted NANOG > archives, but if one's content is good, that would be an > asset, not a liability.
What!? Forcing people to use their real name would improve the quality of NANOG content!? We can't have that, now can we. I disagree that there is such a thing as a well-known alias in the NANOG community, where I define the community as the over 10,000 people who read the list. The number 10,000 comes from the approximate total of subscriber addresses (both per-message and digest subscribers). The actual number of readers is probably larger than this because some addresses are gated into private mailing lists and there must be some people who read through the web archive. But, maybe this whole alias issue is a red herring and we shouldn't worry about it so much. After all, there is nothing magical about real names, even if we tend to use a reserved vocabulary to form them. They are merely labels for a person. The list AUP should be more about content of the messages and less about which labels the writers use. --Michael Dillon
