Re: Is there another NANOG somewhere?
http://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf/current/msg45167.html is about volume. for me, it's not the volume, per se. it is the shameless and (should be) embarrassing self-promotion, the copying and reposting of others' ideas and work, ... and it's not only gadi, but he makes such a good example. randy
Re: Is there another NANOG somewhere?
Martin Hannigan wrote: there's Full Disclosure (another place where I have Gadi kill filed), Are you sure this isn't your own personal issue? yes It actually preserves some sanity. FD is so full of noise that I just read it via gmail. I long ago quit having it arrive here, where I'd pay attention to it right away. Some of what arrives there is useful, while most of it is just noise. I'd hate to have to filter that real time. The usual sycophants are going to start another off topic thread on the usefulness of this on the IETF list, so let's be clear, I'm referencing, not trying to start an IETF discussion. I'm on another list where there's something similar, except that it notes original content vs quoted, html/rich text vs plaintext, and other amusing choices. Nothing wrong with a public, generic, announcement of s/n ratios. It's always the same people. Always. The balance should shift to the hammer for a few months to bring back some equilibrium. -- Any commercial institution that is serious about protecting their customers from phishing will stop sending mail marked up with HTML.
Re: Is there another NANOG somewhere?
On Thu, 15 Feb 2007, Martin Hannigan wrote: http://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf/current/msg45167.html is about volume. for me, it's not the volume, per se. it is the shameless and (should be) embarrassing self-promotion, the copying and reposting of others' ideas and work, ... and it's not only gadi, but he makes such a good example. Lack of reference and cite would be something I would support the AUP discussing. The reason I addressed the volume component is that it seems to go hand in hand i.e. it's always the same poster(s). Overzealous mail list administration would make things only worse (we already experienced it once, remember?). I'd rather we all move one - as has already been made quite clear those who want to block Gadi's messages have already done so and others of us find his posts at times useful and at other times worth no more then delete key that most other messages on the list also experience. As to his lock of modesty and style when referencing other people's work I suggest you take it up with him privately if you think its worth your time. Otherwise I really don't see what nanog-l can do about it as its not a academic paper submissions list and should not become one... -- William Leibzon Elan Networks [EMAIL PROTECTED]
