RE: OT. - The end of inet-access
Thanks for taking the time to help me today. I am subscribed again and I apologize for sending the wrong signal to NANOG today. Operator error *again*. Dee
Re: OT. - The end of inet-access
At 05:04 PM 01/13/2003 -0500, Andy Dills wrote: >Another possible reason inet-access is more on-topic is because JC's ten >times more dictatorial than Susan. She doesn't care if you've been posting >for 7 years, if you annoy her, you're gone unless you do what she tells >you to. But I'm bitter and biased...mea culpa. For the record: The reason you were unsub$cribed is because A) you started a flame war and B) my attempts to email you privately to discuss this (in an attempt to get the flame war to stop) were unsuccessful due to your (IMHO overly aggressive) spam filters bouncing my private email to you. If you had accepted my emails, stopped the flame war, and discussed the issue with me in private email, you would not have been unsub$cribed. And as I said before, you are still welcome to subscribe as long as you agree to follow the list policy, which includes not starting flame wars and ceasing them immediately when you are told to stop. When you elect to bounce email from the list admin at the same time you start and feed a flame war, you run the risk that you can't be told to stop and will be *made* to stop by being unsub$cribed as I will not debate this type of behavior "on the list" nor let the flame war run unchecked. The list membership expects this of the list admin, and I do my best to do a good job. Anyone who thinks I'm not doing the right thing is more than welcome to complain to Avi and offer to do the job instead. jc (the ever under-appreciated *volunteer* inet-admin list administrator)
Re: OT. - The end of inet-access
As for inet-access being more on-topic than NANOG, that's only because the scope of NANOG is much more narrow. On inet-access, you're only off topic if you're not talking about issues related to providing internet access. Another possible reason inet-access is more on-topic is because JC's ten times more dictatorial than Susan. She doesn't care if you've been posting for 7 years, if you annoy her, you're gone unless you do what she tells you to. But I'm bitter and biased...mea culpa. Oh yes. Quite true. She drove me off of it about three years ago. I had been posting my monthly summaries there since joining it in 1994. That action was judged to be unacceptable. From what Dave Hughes tells me the wireless ISP list is where the real action is now. Andy Andy Dills 301-682-9972 Xecunet, LLCwww.xecu.net Dialup * Webhosting * E-Commerce * High-Speed Access -- The COOK Report on Internet, 431 Greenway Ave, Ewing, NJ 08618 USA (609) 882-2572 (phone & fax) [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscription info & prices at http://cookreport.com/subscriptions.shtmlSummary of content for 10 years at http://cookreport.com/past_issues.shtml VoIP Enterprise Adopt & Open Spectrum January Feb 2003 107 pages available at http://cookreport.com/11.11.shtml
Re: OT. - The end of inet-access
On Mon, 13 Jan 2003, JC Dill wrote: > > At 11:51 AM 01/13/2003 -0900, you wrote: > > > >Just wondering if anyone here has some info ? > >Any idea if the final nail is in inet-access ? > > If there is a rumor going around that the end of inet-access is near, > someone forgot to tell me anything about it. The inet-access list is alive > and well, with ~1000 subscribers, and over 100 posts so far in January > 2003. (I know, that's a low number when compared to nanog, but then again > we tend to stay on-topic a bit more over there.) I think the primary problem is that a lot of people were subscribed through twistedpair.ca, which was a redistributer of the list (i.e. you would subscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and get the [EMAIL PROTECTED] mails). They're also the primary result when searching for "inet-access archives" on google. It appears that sometime in september, they got unsubscribed from inet-access, and as a result, people who were subscribed through them, and people who follow along through the archives (like myself), were given the impression it was completely dead. As for inet-access being more on-topic than NANOG, that's only because the scope of NANOG is much more narrow. On inet-access, you're only off topic if you're not talking about issues related to providing internet access. Another possible reason inet-access is more on-topic is because JC's ten times more dictatorial than Susan. She doesn't care if you've been posting for 7 years, if you annoy her, you're gone unless you do what she tells you to. But I'm bitter and biased...mea culpa. Andy Andy Dills 301-682-9972 Xecunet, LLCwww.xecu.net Dialup * Webhosting * E-Commerce * High-Speed Access
Re: OT. - The end of inet-access
At 11:51 AM 01/13/2003 -0900, you wrote: > >Just wondering if anyone here has some info ? >Any idea if the final nail is in inet-access ? If there is a rumor going around that the end of inet-access is near, someone forgot to tell me anything about it. The inet-access list is alive and well, with ~1000 subscribers, and over 100 posts so far in January 2003. (I know, that's a low number when compared to nanog, but then again we tend to stay on-topic a bit more over there.) jc (inet-access list admin)
OT. - The end of inet-access
Just wondering if anyone here has some info ? Any idea if the final nail is in inet-access ? Thanks W.D.McKinney (Dee)
