Sounds like someone has more time to talk/type about political dogma with random strangers than the purpose of this mailing list.
- J On Tue, Jan 19, 2021 at 6:58 AM J. Hellenthal <[email protected]> wrote: > Yeah he did the same dolt act to me to. Just a really bored dolt looking > for nonsense with a crush on AOC. > > -- > J. Hellenthal > > The fact that there's a highway to Hell but only a stairway to Heaven says > a lot about anticipated traffic volume. > > On Jan 19, 2021, at 00:40, Javier J <[email protected]> wrote: > > > you too, why are you emailing me? > > I didn't ask anyone to contact me off list. > > On Mon, Jan 18, 2021 at 8:53 PM Sam Silvester <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> Archives are browsable by anybody. How do you expect to keep political >> types out of the discussion? >> >> On Tue, 19 Jan 2021 at 11:36 am, Javier J <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> I couldn't agree more. >>> If I want to talk politics, I will go to other places. I use this >>> mailing list to talk about things relevant to technology and operation of >>> networks in North American and other places. >>> >>> - Javier >>> >>> >>> On Mon, Jan 18, 2021 at 4:19 PM Mel Beckman <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> javier, >>>> >>>> I concur. What we don’t need on Nanog is outside parties deciding to >>>> “reign in” our discussions on political grounds! >>>> >>>> -mel beckman >>>> >>>> On Jan 18, 2021, at 12:38 PM, Javier J <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> I agree 100%. >>>> >>>> I know the emails on this list are public and that is fine. What I >>>> don't appreciate is that now my email address is in some politico's address >>>> list because of someone's behavior. >>>> >>>> - Javier >>>> >>>> On Mon, Jan 18, 2021 at 3:20 PM Jon Lewis <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> There's a world of difference between "don't expect list posts to be >>>>> private to list members" and "don't forward the list to >>>>> autoresponders." >>>>> The stupidity of the latter, if it can be tracked down to who did it, >>>>> should result in their removal from the list, at least until they >>>>> explain >>>>> what caused them to do that and have undone it. >>>>> >>>>> On Mon, 18 Jan 2021, Paul Timmins wrote: >>>>> >>>>> > The list has public archives. Draw your own conclusions on the >>>>> policy. >>>>> > >>>>> > https://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/ >>>>> > >>>>> > On 1/18/21 2:40 PM, Anne P. Mitchell, Esq. wrote: >>>>> >> Not under that impression at all. That's very different from "what >>>>> is the >>>>> >> policy" - at least in the groups I run, if the policy is "no >>>>> sharing >>>>> >> offlist" and then someone does, there are consequences for that >>>>> someone. >>>>> >> Anne >>>>> >> >>>>> >> -- >>>>> >> Anne P. Mitchell, Attorney at Law >>>>> >> Dean of Cyberlaw & Cybersecurity, Lincoln Law School >>>>> >> Author: Section 6 of the CAN-SPAM Act of 2003 (the Federal >>>>> anti-spam law) >>>>> >> Board of Directors, Denver Internet Exchange >>>>> >> Chair Emeritus, Asilomar Microcomputer Workshop >>>>> >> Former Counsel: Mail Abuse Prevention System (MAPS) >>>>> >> >>>>> > >>>>> >>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>> Jon Lewis, MCP :) | I route >>>>> StackPath, Sr. Neteng | therefore you are >>>>> _________ http://www.lewis.org/~jlewis/pgp for PGP public key_________ >>>>> >>>>
