On Tue, 16 Oct 2007, Alex Pilosov wrote:
Also, possibly, instead of posting to -announce, a direct email to
last-registered-email should be sent to each eligible voter reminding them
to vote - Some people who attend aren't on any mailing list. (actually, it
is an interesting data point, but proba
On Mon, 8 Oct 2007, Joel Jaeggli wrote:
I actually think the PC has done a pretty good job over the last 6
meetings. It's entirely possible that I have a strong cognitive bias due
to my participation in it. However, that reminds me. We could use more
nominees/volunteers for the PC, in the next 8
On Mon, 26 Feb 2007, Robert E. Seastrom wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I didn't go to Toronto (among with some others I know), because 32F in NY
is still better than 10F there. :)
More like 1F. When the mercury climbed to 14F, my windshield washer
fluid thawed (yay!).
... and the weather
On Mon, 26 Feb 2007, Lucy Lynch wrote:
I'd have a much easier time getting them to let me go to LA or SF, simply
because they aren't pervceived as prime vacation destinations, beaches
and all.
No beaches in Santo Domingo (beaches in LA and SF, however)
Are we thinking of the same place?
http
On Mon, 26 Feb 2007, Joe Abley wrote:
So, to be clear, you do not expect that you'd be able to come to a meeting in
the Dominican Republic, but you'd have no such problem persuading people to
let you go to (say) Los Angeles or San Francisco?
I'd have a much easier time getting them to let me g
On Mon, 26 Feb 2007, Joe Abley wrote:
We would be interested to hear what people think about this idea. For
example:
How would this fit with your corporate travel policies?
Would you be more or less likely to attend a winter meeting in the
Dominican compared to soemewhere in the US or Canada?
On Mon, 19 Feb 2007, Gadi Evron wrote:
On Mon, 19 Feb 2007, Robert E. Seastrom wrote:
I'm 100% OK with Gadi forwarding our personal correspondence and in
fact encourage it (both my emails and his responses, please!) so that
people can draw their own conclusions.
Don't we both wish? What's priv
On Mon, 19 Feb 2007, Gadi Evron wrote:
Never argued with any of that. Thank yoiu for making that clear. How, if
you don't mind, I will state that mentioning Robert's lack of
professionalism with personal atacks against me, even on this list, was
something that I put out as full disclosure for the
On Mon, 19 Feb 2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Back to the point. If we are going to have an MLC, then what should they
be doing? How should they be doing it? My opinion is that they should be
acting professionally in a manner calculated to encourage other list
members to act professionally on the
On Mon, 19 Feb 2007, Robert E. Seastrom wrote:
From my perspective these are (collectively) relics of the days before
RSS, while I recognize that some are relatively new. I would welcome
their migration to another delivery means, along with pointers to them
being added to the community wiki.
P
On Mon, 19 Feb 2007, Gadi Evron wrote:
There
is a lot of participation and operational interest in certain field you
currently classify as off topic.
... and this, of course, being a canonical example of the type of
communication I mentioned in the previous email, where you have one person
asse
On Mon, 19 Feb 2007, Joe Abley wrote:
On 19-Feb-2007, at 09:17, Gadi Evron wrote:
There
is a lot of participation and operational interest in certain field you
currently classify as off topic.
... and this, of course, being a canonical example of the type of
communication I mentioned in the p
On Mon, 19 Feb 2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The MLC should send out a form letter which is carefully worded to avoid
giving offense but which firmly states that after polling the members
opinions on this issue, most people felt that this topic does not belong
on NANOG. Followed by a request fo
On Mon, 19 Feb 2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hands-on doesn't have to mean nasty. It could simply mean having a
higher public profile and asking more questions. Posting a message that
says "X is not an appropriate topic for this list" comes off as
heavy-handed. Posting a message that says "Are y
On Fri, 16 Feb 2007, Martin Hannigan wrote:
That's not part of the proposal, nor is the article on the Wiki
really a proposal. It's a stub to see if anyone in the community
is going to contribute to trying to resolve many of the repetitive
complaints we've been reading about and discussing.
I t
On Wed, 14 Feb 2007, Etaoin Shrdlu wrote:
NANOG-L is unique. There isn't anything else devoted to issues for truly
large networks, and the providers that manage the distance between them. When
I see Cisco (or Juniper, or Extreme) announcements about a vulnerability,
those are useful. Nonsense a
On Mon, 16 Oct 2006, Martin Hannigan wrote:
Cat, not necessarily all directed at you, but I've read many of
the responses and here goes:
Not to worry - my comments were just addressed to the idea of public
rating, and not to the performance of the PC in general.
cheers!
===
On Mon, 16 Oct 2006, Curtis Villamizar wrote:
Would it help if you could see anonymous ratings without the comments
that go with the ratings? Providing the comments would just mean
people wouldn't record some (maybe most) of their comments and would
have to make comments on the call.
While I'd
18 matches
Mail list logo
