I personally have no issue with the OP, or the idea of recognizing the work of those who have come before.
I just don't want to see this devolve into a pissing match that ends up requiring a rule to be created about such things. On Mon, Jan 25, 2021 at 1:31 PM Mel Beckman <m...@beckman.org> wrote: > Tom, > > I think it’s fair to defend good and decent ideas on NANOG. > > In my opinion, it’s a good and decent idea that we spend a tiny amount of > bandwidth acknowledging Internet pioneers and helping them as they > encounter unexpected adversity. Jim’s posting of Ed Hew’s GoFundMe is just > such a good and decent idea. I think Jim for it. > > Not all of us are blessed with well-paying jobs and benefits at Fortune > 500 companies. And health crises can strike any of us. > > There, but for the grace of God, go we all. > > -mel > > On Jan 25, 2021, at 10:12 AM, Tom Beecher <beec...@beecher.cc> wrote: > > Guys, let's maybe turn the temperature down a bit. > > On Mon, Jan 25, 2021 at 1:04 PM Mel Beckman <m...@beckman.org> wrote: > >> Bill, >> >> So, we can only mention in this forum the actual death of Internet >> pioneers, such as Mark Crispin, Jon Postel, and Jeanette Symons? >> >> What if the person’s health is tied to a major infrastructure component, >> such as http://www.registry.ca? <http://www.registry.ca/?> No? Not a >> valid “operational” case? >> >> Your position seems to be "let us nip this in sad news the bud, before it >> spreads". Because, I guess, there are literally millions of selfless >> Internet pioneers, and we don’t want NANOG to be flooded with their >> memories, or at least their pleas for modest assistance as a token of >> appreciation for their lifetime of contribution. >> >> “NANOG owes them nothing!”, you didn’t say, but I heard. >> >> -mel >> >> On Jan 25, 2021, at 9:23 AM, William Herrin <b...@herrin.us> wrote: >> >> On Mon, Jan 25, 2021 at 8:40 AM Jim Mercer <j...@reptiles.org> wrote: >> >> unsure if this is allowed or not, but, here goes. >> >> >> Hi Jim, >> >> This is a lie. If you weren't sure, you'd have asked if it was ok to >> do the thing without actually doing the thing. That you went ahead and >> did it says you were pretty sure it was against the rules and figured >> you could get away with it. You may be right but the lie compounds the >> offense. >> >> I'm sorry to hear about Ed. Nevertheless, a lot of us are getting on >> in age and health and the Internet doesn't need another mailing list >> about how sad it is to grow old. >> >> May I suggest: spend a line in your signature block on the off-topic >> things you want folks on this group to know. And then attach it only >> to messages which are on topic. >> >> Regards, >> Bill Herrin >> >> >> >