[Nanog-futures] [OT] [IP] ICANN President: $750, 000+$195, 000 bonus vs President of US: $400, 000

2010-02-12 Thread Gregory Hicks
End Forwarded Message - ----- Gregory Hicks | Principal Systems Engineer | Direct: 408.569.7928 People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf -- George O

Re: [Nanog-futures] Subject line Tag and footer

2008-05-07 Thread Gregory Hicks
announce] NANOG43 in Brooklyn Registration & Hotel -- Cheap rates going going ... Which shows up in the MUA as "Re: [Nanog-futures] [NANOG] [NANOG-" And THAT is truly useful - NOT. Regards, Gregory Hicks > > > > > > Ditto, my vote is to keep it. > > > &g

Re: [Nanog-futures] Subject line Tag and footer

2008-05-06 Thread Gregory Hicks
> Date: Tue, 6 May 2008 07:04:47 -0400 > From: Rich Kulawiec <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [Nanog-futures] Subject line Tag and footer > > On Tue, May 06, 2008 at 08:44:25AM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > This list is archived on several websites. It is useful to

Re: [Nanog-futures] Subject line Tag and footer

2008-05-05 Thread Gregory Hicks
> If given a choice, I would opt for neither. But I can't say that I am > especially bothered about either, either. I concur. If given a choice, I would opt for neither the subject tag nor the footer - especially given the info given in each message's headers. Delete the the subj

Re: [Nanog-futures] level of fail

2008-02-26 Thread Gregory Hicks
ouldn't attend... (Too expensive since I have to pay out of my own pocket...) Regards, Gregory Hicks > > There's definitely a "its too hard" limit. :) > > Adrian - I am perfectly capable of learning

Re: [Nanog-futures] Cisco outage

2007-11-28 Thread Gregory Hicks
connectivity. (White listing could have solved the connectivity issue.) My $0.02 worth Regards, GRegory Hicks ___ Nanog-futures mailing list Nanog-futures@nanog.org http://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog-futures

RE: mail operators list

2007-10-31 Thread Gregory Hicks
- > > > > Wasn't that already tried with nanog-offtopic? (or whatever the actual list name was...) nanog-offtopic, funsec, privacy, et al... (funsec and Privacy are still going...) nanog-ot kinda went... down. > > scott &