Perhaps we could invert the modest propsal thusly:
If the topic of discussion has been or is likely to be a presentation topic,
then it is known to be on-topic for the mailing list. Other topics may or may
not, at mlc discretion, etc.
(I'm also reasonably happy with the way things are now, and
This is the internet, can't give too much credit.
On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 8:27 PM, Jo Rhett wrote:
> On Jun 9, 2009, at 5:58 PM, Scott Weeks wrote:
>> 'Select All' on the 'Subject' you don't want to read about and
>> delete. A few hours turns into a few minutes... :-)
>
>
> I do that, but at risk.
On Tue, Jun 09, 2009 at 05:18:51PM -0700, Jo Rhett wrote:
> Very simple idea: if it hasn't been a topic in the NANOG conference,
> and is unlikely to be a topic in the NANOG conference, it doesn't
> belong on the mailing list.
That *has* been the yardstick for suggested good topics for at leas
On Tue, Jun 09, 2009 at 05:58:03PM -0700, Scott Weeks wrote:
>
>
> --- jrh...@netconsonance.com wrote:
> Perhaps you have time to sit and hit delete for a few hours every day
> before you find a single post relevant to your job. I don't, and
>
>
>
> 'Sele
Hello,
As I am sure you already know Comcast is hosting NANOG46
(http://www.nanog.org/meetings/nanog46/index.php) in the city of
Philadelphia, PA USA. Given the location, and the relevance to the
community, we elected to organize a Cable Broadband and IPv6 demonstration.
Our demonstration will in
On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 8:32 PM, Jo Rhett wrote:
> On May 1, 2009, at 1:34 PM, Martin Hannigan wrote:
>
>> I think most of us are broad minded and appreciate common sense topics
>> related to network operations.
>>
>
> Yes.
>
> Most know what that is. No need to make
>> rules to assault the few,
