On Sun, Apr 27, 2008 at 11:01 AM, Todd Underwood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > y'all > > > On Sun, Apr 27, 2008 at 09:43:54AM -0400, Martin Hannigan wrote: > > On Sun, Apr 27, 2008 at 7:32 AM, Todd Underwood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > randy, > > > > > > On Sun, Apr 27, 2008 at 12:12:24PM +0900, Randy Bush wrote: > > > > [ moved to futures ] > > > > [ snip ] > > > > > marty: did you submit or recruit any talk on anything at all that you > > > think was misjudged by the PC? did you suggest to someone on the PC > > > that we recruit a specific talk that we didn't follow up on? if so, > > > please let me know immediately and we'll try to get more on the ball > > > for nanog 44 in LA. > > > > > > I think most people see this as a deflection and will take it for > > defensive much? :-)
No, but the copy of 'How to be a Gentleman' that I purchased last year advised me that I should not stoop lower than the person who egregiously addressed me. I think it worked. :-) I understand that your views are differing from mine on this, I've seen your anti-v6 talks, but that doesn't mean I shouldn't ask you about it as the "program chair". I read the ABQ survey. I'm not sure how you came up with a lack of interest on the attendees part. It looked like a mandate to me. If you want to continue to challenge me to come up with the v6 content, I'll be happy to. Make it official. There's no need to flame, bait, or attack otherwise. I'll be happy to suffer your abuse in that capacity. Until then, I'd appreciate it if some extra effort could be expended in figuring out how to get some v6 content into the program as we move forward. Best Regards, Martin _______________________________________________ Nanog-futures mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog-futures
