On Jun 14, 2016, at 11:20 AM, Daniel Golding <dgold...@gmail.com> wrote: > > John, > > We've had this for years. https://www.nanog.org/governance/attendance > > If you notice similarities - they are intentional.
<chuckle> > If you notice differences - NANOG has always had a higher threshold for a > frank exchange of views between participants. We have no desire to stifle > that. Makes perfect sense to me - thanks for the pointer! So, you’ve set expectations, and those include a clear reporting and enforcement process, so is discussion of the session in question (I actually have no idea which one it is ) on a mailing list really the right approach? Alternatively should folks who feel there was an issue just follow the reporting process? (rhetorical question) /John Disclaimer: my views alone.
