Randy Bush wrote: > > but, with no data from our fearless [0] leadership, what else are we to > do, talk about NATO black helicopters?
We could talk about natto, but what is there to say about fermented soy beans other than they are sticky and stink? Seriously, though, I get the feeling that the discussion around this whole matter is due to the lack of information regarding why THIS SC felt the need to depart from the status quo when it appears to others to have been working [1], and a concern that whatever come next may not be sustainable. Of course, another part of this is that NANOG is a community with no real concept of membership. Some may feel that THIS SC is trying to hijack NANOG by incorporating and obtaining some nefarious legal status. If the corporate entity fails to fulfill the membership's needs, the the NANOG community is left without the resources of the NANOG banner, and will have to try to re-create from scratch. I mean, who wants to attend the North America Network Operators Community (NANOC) meetings when they are expecting the NANOG meetings? I would think that there may also me less apprehension if as part of incorporating, THIS SC was disbanded, and a new election was held for the new board of directors. We certainly should reward all the hard work that it takes make this happen, but anything that THIS SC does, should not mean automatic entitlement to some type of corporate royal status. [1] Working as defined as the Internet presence was up and reachable for 99+ percent of the time, and the meetings took place as expected with topics that were interesting, although not interesting to all the people all the time. -Sean _______________________________________________ Nanog-futures mailing list [email protected] https://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog-futures
