Re: [Nanog-futures] ADMIN: Reminder on off-topic threads
Moderation has never worked well. Personal choice, killfiles, are optimal IMHO. I agree. is there another ops group, ripe, sanog, apops, afnog, ... which seems to need/want moderation? i am not aware of any other list i read that is moderated. if not, does that seem a bit strange to anyone (else)? and the moderation has not, imiho, improved the content of the mailing list. the bean counters, albeit well meaning, only know how to cut expenses. you don't make a successful company by throttling expense. it's the income that makes a company. randy ___ Nanog-futures mailing list Nanog-futures@nanog.org http://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog-futures
Re: [Nanog-futures] Fwd: ADMIN: Reminder on off-topic threads
Let's try and take a step back, and see how low-key moderation works again? No, let's not. To steal a line from rbush, we tried that three years ago and it didn't work then. actually it did The current MLC's approach is working Just Fine; in your opinion mine differs ___ Nanog-futures mailing list Nanog-futures@nanog.org http://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog-futures
Re: [Nanog-futures] Fwd: ADMIN: Reminder on off-topic threads
Robert E. Seastrom wrote: No, let's not. To steal a line from rbush, we tried that three years ago and it didn't work then. Good point, but the situation is very different than what it was three years ago. We have a moderation team, we have nanog-futures for meta discussion, etc. Further, we don't disagree. I am with you that the MLC does a good job and has a good approach. What I am saying is not to dump everything, but rather now that issues are resolved, how about a lighted finger on that moderate button? Thanks for letting me know I wasn't clear in my statement. The current MLC's approach is working Just Fine; apparently they have found the proper balance. Don't mess with success. How do you define balance? The threads on nanog-futures clearly show the balance is not there. The MLC does a good job and the moderation isn't working well. These two facts need to be aligned. What we are not happy with is how moderation works. -r Gadi. ___ Nanog-futures mailing list Nanog-futures@nanog.org http://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog-futures
Re: [Nanog-futures] Fwd: ADMIN: Reminder on off-topic threads
On Thu, 23 Apr 2009, Gadi Evron wrote: facts need to be aligned. What we are not happy with is how moderation works. Speak for yourself ; I'm quite sure that I'm not a part of the 'we' you mention here. cheers! == A cat spends her life conflicted between a deep, passionate and profound desire for fish and an equally deep, passionate and profound desire to avoid getting wet. This is the defining metaphor of my life right now. ___ Nanog-futures mailing list Nanog-futures@nanog.org http://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog-futures
Re: [Nanog-futures] Fwd: ADMIN: Reminder on off-topic threads
Cat Okita wrote: On Thu, 23 Apr 2009, Gadi Evron wrote: facts need to be aligned. What we are not happy with is how moderation works. Speak for yourself ; I'm quite sure that I'm not a part of the 'we' you mention here. Indeed! ;) To be clear, we includes me and others who spoke here who believe moderation is not working well. But let us try and look at what we do agree on: 1. MLC is doing a good job. 2. Things are much better now. Does that narrow our disagreement to how moderation is done in practice? Gadi. ___ Nanog-futures mailing list Nanog-futures@nanog.org http://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog-futures
Re: [Nanog-futures] ADMIN: Reminder on off-topic threads
Moderation has never worked well. Personal choice, killfiles, are optimal IMHO. Best, Martin On 4/23/09, Gadi Evron g...@linuxbox.org wrote: Cat Okita wrote: On Thu, 23 Apr 2009, Gadi Evron wrote: facts need to be aligned. What we are not happy with is how moderation works. Speak for yourself ; I'm quite sure that I'm not a part of the 'we' you mention here. Indeed! ;) To be clear, we includes me and others who spoke here who believe moderation is not working well. But let us try and look at what we do agree on: 1. MLC is doing a good job. 2. Things are much better now. Does that narrow our disagreement to how moderation is done in practice? Gadi. ___ Nanog-futures mailing list Nanog-futures@nanog.org http://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog-futures -- Martin Hannigan mar...@theicelandguy.com p: +16178216079 Power, Network, and Costs Consulting for Iceland Datacenters and Occupants ___ Nanog-futures mailing list Nanog-futures@nanog.org http://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog-futures
Re: [Nanog-futures] Fwd: ADMIN: Reminder on off-topic threads
On Apr 23, 2009, at 4:14 AM, Gadi Evron wrote: What I am saying is not to dump everything, but rather now that issues are resolved, how about a lighted finger on that moderate button? The issues are not resolved. How about a slightly heavier finger on the moderate button? Gadi, everyone here understands that you want NANOG to be a all-things- Gadi-wants-to-talk about. The rest of us prefer to keep topics relevant to their list, and not discuss the same topic on multiple mailing lists. -- Jo Rhett Net Consonance : consonant endings by net philanthropy, open source and other randomness ___ Nanog-futures mailing list Nanog-futures@nanog.org http://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog-futures
Re: [Nanog-futures] Fwd: ADMIN: Reminder on off-topic threads
Hey Jo, On 23-Apr-2009, at 13:56, Jo Rhett wrote: Gadi, everyone here understands that you want NANOG to be a all- things- Gadi-wants-to-talk about. Personally, I find the ad-hominem attacks against gadi (of which this is a surely mild example) far more annoying than anything gadi has posted to this list or the main one in the past few years. Just saying. Joe ___ Nanog-futures mailing list Nanog-futures@nanog.org http://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog-futures
Re: [Nanog-futures] Fwd: ADMIN: Reminder on off-topic threads
On 23-Apr-2009, at 07:14, Gadi Evron wrote: The threads on nanog-futures clearly show the balance is not there. The goal should not be to have nanog-futures descend into silence; the goal should be to have a useful mix of productive conversation on the main list. You can have the latter without the former. I would argue in fact that if this list is silent, the main list is in trouble: the fact that people are posting here shows that they are still engaged, and still care. That's a good thing. Joe ___ Nanog-futures mailing list Nanog-futures@nanog.org http://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog-futures
Re: [Nanog-futures] Fwd: ADMIN: Reminder on off-topic threads
Back when I ran the PC, people used to suggest that we split our meetings up into tracks. Most folks wanted two tracks: one for stuff they were interested in, and one for everything else. The mailing list is the same way, everyone has a different idea of what's interesting and on-topic. The challenge for the MLC, and the community, is to determine a rough consensus and implement it. And it will always be a moving target, as people and technologies change. My sense is that the current moderation policy is reasonable, though a bit more discussion is warranted and documentation is needed. The list of what's on-topic is more fluid, and periodically needs a new round of consensus-building and AUP rewriting. And that's what I'd like to see this discussion become. Disclaimer: I'm the Steering Committee liaison to the MLC, but these are my personal opinions. Steve ___ Nanog-futures mailing list Nanog-futures@nanog.org http://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog-futures
Re: [Nanog-futures] ADMIN: Reminder on off-topic threads
--- mar...@theicelandguy.com wrote: From: Martin Hannigan mar...@theicelandguy.com Moderation has never worked well. Personal choice, killfiles, are optimal IMHO. I agree. scott - ___ Nanog-futures mailing list Nanog-futures@nanog.org http://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog-futures
Re: [Nanog-futures] Fwd: ADMIN: Reminder on off-topic threads
On 23 Apr 2009, at 20:55, Jo Rhett wrote: It wasn't meant as an attack. I hope it wasn't interpretted that way. Yeah, it wasn't a very good message to reply to in order to make that point. Sorry if it felt like I was beating you up. There are so many knee-jerk mails that it's easy to classify things as knee-jerk anti- gadi and everything else. For the record I've met Gadi (hi, Gadi!), and have drunk beer with him, and I have time for him, and perhaps that also colours some of the irritation I feel when I see what looks like attacks at the person rather than attacks at the point under discussion. And it wasn't specific. Nanog shouldn't be everything-Jo-wants-to- talk-about or everything-Randy-wants-to-talk-about or anything else. Very much agreed, and in that spirit... It's focus should be on the ONE topic, and related topics are better covered in their own mailing lists. ... it often feels like a mistake to use absolute language when describing whether things are on-topic or not for the main list. What is clearly an ARIN policy for some people is apparently operational for others, for example. OK, maybe bad example, maybe everybody realises it's policy but has poor impulse control. Personally, when I take the time to think before I hit send, I ask myself (a) is this something that someone running an ISP would care about, and (b) am I prepared to spend time after this message contributing to the thread, assuming I have something further to add. If the answer to both is yes, (or if I have an inappropriate amount of alcohol or caffeine or both in my bloodstream, or if I suffer from poor impulse control for some other reason since clearly I at least as much as the next person) I hit send. On futures, however, I just hit send. :-) Joe ___ Nanog-futures mailing list Nanog-futures@nanog.org http://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog-futures
Re: [Nanog-futures] Fwd: ADMIN: Reminder on off-topic threads
On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 09:10:31PM -0400, Joe Abley wrote: On 23 Apr 2009, at 20:55, Jo Rhett wrote: And it wasn't specific. Nanog shouldn't be everything-Jo-wants-to- talk-about or everything-Randy-wants-to-talk-about or anything else. !snork!... rubbing the sleep from remaining good eye... Very much agreed, and in that spirit... It's focus should be on the ONE topic, and related topics are better covered in their own mailing lists. AhAH! the setup On futures, however, I just hit send. :-) and permission!?!!?! (thanks Joe) Joe EVERYONE IS ENTITLED TO MY OPINION - (the old skool NANOG motto) --bill (settling back into sleep) ___ Nanog-futures mailing list Nanog-futures@nanog.org http://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog-futures
Re: [Nanog-futures] Fwd: ADMIN: Reminder on off-topic threads
On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 09:43:22PM -0700, Paul Ferguson wrote: But I have to say (again, apologies) that security issues on the Internet - -- and especially the lack of engagement from ISPs -- is a major, major problem that NANOG could be a major facilitator, instead of turning its back on the woeful state of security affairs. I strongly concur with this. In any event, I think security-related issues are much more on topic than ARIN IPv4 policy foo. I think I mildly disagree with this. The allocation of chunks of IPv4 space to dedicated abusers, and the hijacking of chunks of IPv4 space by abusers, are security-related issues. So if you mean ARIN IPv4 policy in the sense of what their policies and procedures are, then I agree with you; if you mean it in the sense of what the real-world consequences are, then I'm not so sure. ---Rsk ___ Nanog-futures mailing list Nanog-futures@nanog.org http://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog-futures
Re: [Nanog-futures] Fwd: ADMIN: Reminder on off-topic threads
On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 05:46:50AM -0400, Rich Kulawiec wrote: On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 09:43:22PM -0700, Paul Ferguson wrote: [snip] In any event, I think security-related issues are much more on topic than ARIN IPv4 policy foo. I think I mildly disagree with this. The allocation of chunks of IPv4 space to dedicated abusers, and the hijacking of chunks of IPv4 space by abusers, are security-related issues. So if you mean ARIN IPv4 policy in the sense of what their policies and procedures are, then I agree with you; if you mean it in the sense of what the real-world consequences are, then I'm not so sure. Same here. Our ongoing problem (if one would call it that) is being a successful, large-tent organization. -- RSUC / GweepNet / Spunk / FnB / Usenix / SAGE ___ Nanog-futures mailing list Nanog-futures@nanog.org http://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog-futures
Re: [Nanog-futures] Fwd: ADMIN: Reminder on off-topic threads
Paul Ferguson fergdawgs...@gmail.com writes: The issue where is the pragmatism fairness of the MLC. So throw your hat in the ring next time there is a call for volunteers for the MLC. -r ___ Nanog-futures mailing list Nanog-futures@nanog.org http://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog-futures
Re: [Nanog-futures] Fwd: ADMIN: Reminder on off-topic threads
On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 09:32:13PM -0700, Paul Ferguson wrote: [snip] I don't mind gentle reminders, but non-specific gestures cloud the issue and sometimes appear hypocritical. I could easily name a few other threads on NANOG currently that I believe are off-topic, so if the MLC is going to send gentle-reminders, could it please be a bit more fair specific in it's reminders? That is all I ask, because right now, it seems rather arbitrary. I know in the past there was definitely a great deal of effort to balance the private reminders with the public to avoid noise and interminable meta- conversations. My impression is we're still seeing that balancing effort, so I'm boggled by the comment. A public reminder about three elements of a couple threads which were heading off the beam seems sane rather than 'hypocritical' or 'arbitrary'. If you've a specific suggestion for what can be done, the please share it. I think the MLC has been doing a good job and would be more than open to specific, constructive critique. Cheers! Joe -- RSUC / GweepNet / Spunk / FnB / Usenix / SAGE ___ Nanog-futures mailing list Nanog-futures@nanog.org http://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog-futures
Re: [Nanog-futures] Fwd: ADMIN: Reminder on off-topic threads
On Apr 22, 2009, at 3:31 AM, Joe Provo wrote: I think the MLC has been doing a good job I would like to say that I agree with this statement. I think the MLC is doing a better job than previously, and could improve the list even a bit more if they cracked down sooner on these threads. Thank you, and keep up the good work. -- Jo Rhett Net Consonance : consonant endings by net philanthropy, open source and other randomness ___ Nanog-futures mailing list Nanog-futures@nanog.org http://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog-futures
[Nanog-futures] Fwd: ADMIN: Reminder on off-topic threads
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 I had originally just deleted this message, but after thinking about it for a few minutes, felt compelled to send to -futures. If website security is off-topic for NANOG, when there are legitimate questions answers from legitimate NANOG participants, then I fail to see how n the world NANOG plans to retain participants in the face of fake exclusivity. No, really -- and I don;t mean this as a troll or some sort of NANOG-basher -- I've been involved with NANOG since the mid-1990's (actually earlier), and I am somewhat distressed in seeing (what I consider to be) hypocritical list moderation. It's no wonder some of the old-timers have pretty much given up on NANOG. Pretty sad, actually. When security issues are no longer on-topic for NANOG, then NANOG starts becoming part of the problem, and not the solution. Apologies, - - ferg - -- Forwarded message -- From: Simon Lyall si...@darkmere.gen.nz Date: Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 8:49 PM Subject: ADMIN: Reminder on off-topic threads To: na...@nanog.org A reminder that discussion of the following topics are off-topic for the NANOG list. * Website security * Corporate governance * Arin IP address policy Please ensure that posts are network operations orientated. Simon Lyall NANOG MLC ( on behalf of) - -- Simon Lyall | Very Busy | Web: http://www.darkmere.gen.nz/ To stay awake all night adds a day to your life - Stilgar | eMT. [snip] -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: PGP Desktop 9.5.3 (Build 5003) wj8DBQFJ7peDq1pz9mNUZTMRAgq8AKCLVNreIyvdUWh6hRQXkr1fyJqv4wCg25E9 iY8HiLxQtPrFcX7qe515PCg= =Cqrc -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- Fergie, a.k.a. Paul Ferguson Engineering Architecture for the Internet fergdawgster(at)gmail.com ferg's tech blog: http://fergdawg.blogspot.com/ ___ Nanog-futures mailing list Nanog-futures@nanog.org http://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog-futures
Re: [Nanog-futures] Fwd: ADMIN: Reminder on off-topic threads
On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 12:05 AM, Paul Ferguson fergdawgs...@gmail.com wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 I had originally just deleted this message, but after thinking about it for a few minutes, felt compelled to send to -futures. If website security is off-topic for NANOG, when there are legitimate is the distinction the mailing-list-admin folk are making one of: 'you need to do X,Y, Z to make your website secure' (on-topic) vs 'your website is hacked' (not on topic) Or, given the content on the last 'web security' thread (which admittedly I deleted 80% of) debating how some set of websites gets 'hacked' considered 'off topic' ? I, personally, don't care either (about the content) way my delete key works well enough... (or 'y' key). I do care that conversation that may be on-topic gets stifled unnecessarily. I don't mind gentle reminders though of what may be on/off topic. -Chris ___ Nanog-futures mailing list Nanog-futures@nanog.org http://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog-futures
Re: [Nanog-futures] Fwd: ADMIN: Reminder on off-topic threads
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 9:25 PM, Christopher Morrow morrowc.li...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 12:05 AM, Paul Ferguson fergdawgs...@gmail.com wrote: I had originally just deleted this message, but after thinking about it for a few minutes, felt compelled to send to -futures. If website security is off-topic for NANOG, when there are legitimate is the distinction the mailing-list-admin folk are making one of: 'you need to do X,Y, Z to make your website secure' (on-topic) vs 'your website is hacked' (not on topic) Or, given the content on the last 'web security' thread (which admittedly I deleted 80% of) debating how some set of websites gets 'hacked' considered 'off topic' ? I, personally, don't care either (about the content) way my delete key works well enough... (or 'y' key). I do care that conversation that may be on-topic gets stifled unnecessarily. I don't mind gentle reminders though of what may be on/off topic. I don't mind gentle reminders, but non-specific gestures cloud the issue and sometimes appear hypocritical. I could easily name a few other threads on NANOG currently that I believe are off-topic, so if the MLC is going to send gentle-reminders, could it please be a bit more fair specific in it's reminders? That is all I ask, because right now, it seems rather arbitrary. Thanks, - - ferg -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: PGP Desktop 9.5.3 (Build 5003) wj8DBQFJ7p3Hq1pz9mNUZTMRAj1XAKDKEONXeay15isNGlLGBs6EojaOvgCg9AEO D01AR4AdDoJz18zbQtQBX+s= =Pz6i -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- Fergie, a.k.a. Paul Ferguson Engineering Architecture for the Internet fergdawgster(at)gmail.com ferg's tech blog: http://fergdawg.blogspot.com/ ___ Nanog-futures mailing list Nanog-futures@nanog.org http://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog-futures
Re: [Nanog-futures] Fwd: ADMIN: Reminder on off-topic threads
On Wed, 22 Apr 2009, Christopher Morrow wrote: is the distinction the mailing-list-admin folk are making one of: 'you need to do X,Y, Z to make your website secure' (on-topic) vs 'your website is hacked' (not on topic) Well personally I meant: Isn't this list about routing and BGP rather than writing your php scripts correctly? But other people on the MLC might have differing opinion about exactly what they didn't like about the threads. -- Simon Lyall | Very Busy | Web: http://www.darkmere.gen.nz/ To stay awake all night adds a day to your life - Stilgar | eMT. ___ Nanog-futures mailing list Nanog-futures@nanog.org http://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog-futures
Re: [Nanog-futures] Fwd: ADMIN: Reminder on off-topic threads
On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 12:34 AM, Simon Lyall si...@darkmere.gen.nz wrote: On Wed, 22 Apr 2009, Christopher Morrow wrote: is the distinction the mailing-list-admin folk are making one of: 'you need to do X,Y, Z to make your website secure' (on-topic) vs 'your website is hacked' (not on topic) Well personally I meant: Isn't this list about routing and BGP rather than writing your php scripts correctly? The list is about 'network operations' which in a narrow view can just mean 'routing and bgp' or 'routers and bgp', sure. It could also mean things like: What is, and how does one do, peering at Internet scale?. It could also mean: Security of things on my portion of the Internet, how do I do that 'better' or 'properly'? Looking at content at meetings there's a hefty helping of 'security' and 'peering' as well as all manner of 'routing' topics... One might think then that 'security' (even web-server security) falls into the realm of 'on topci' a little bit. I don't want to see a tutorial of 'php best security practices' here, but if someone's out of their depth and stuck dealing with some operational issues related to that sort of problem a quick conversation and referrals to the right references (and or off-list help) seems reaosnable. Again, I didn't read probably 80% of the 'my webserver was hacked' thread, but... But other people on the MLC might have differing opinion about exactly what they didn't like about the threads. so long as it's a consensus and the consensus is even keeled I don't mind. I think the 'arbitrary process' is what got is an 'mlc' in the first place though so I don't want to see us repeat mistakes. :) also, what is this wierd footer?? divbr/div -Chris ___ Nanog-futures mailing list Nanog-futures@nanog.org http://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog-futures
Re: [Nanog-futures] Fwd: ADMIN: Reminder on off-topic threads
On Tue, 21 Apr 2009, Paul Ferguson wrote: But I have to say (again, apologies) that security issues on the Internet - -- and especially the lack of engagement from ISPs -- is a major, major problem that NANOG could be a major facilitator, instead of turning its back on the woeful state of security affairs. Ah, yes -- yet another morass of screaming well meaning people providing solutions in search of problems... In any event, I think security-related issues are much more on topic than ARIN IPv4 policy foo. I think there are a lot of places that discuss security -- and far fewer places discussing ARIN's IPv4 policy foo. cheers! == A cat spends her life conflicted between a deep, passionate and profound desire for fish and an equally deep, passionate and profound desire to avoid getting wet. This is the defining metaphor of my life right now. ___ Nanog-futures mailing list Nanog-futures@nanog.org http://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog-futures
ADMIN: Reminder on off-topic threads
A reminder that discussion of the following topics are off-topic for the NANOG list. * Website security * Corporate governance * Arin IP address policy Please ensure that posts are network operations orientated. Simon Lyall NANOG MLC ( on behalf of) -- Simon Lyall | Very Busy | Web: http://www.darkmere.gen.nz/ To stay awake all night adds a day to your life - Stilgar | eMT.
Re: ADMIN: Reminder on off-topic threads
A reminder that discussion of the following topics are off-topic for the NANOG list. * Website security * Corporate governance * Arin IP address policy Please ensure that posts are network operations orientated. How about the operational relevance of strategies of how to proceed in operating and growing networks once all the IPv4 space is exhausted? It may not be wise to wait until ARIN allocates 256.0.0.0/8 to someone and everyone chimes in to note that their routers are barfing on that. :-/ ... JG -- Joe Greco - sol.net Network Services - Milwaukee, WI - http://www.sol.net We call it the 'one bite at the apple' rule. Give me one chance [and] then I won't contact you again. - Direct Marketing Ass'n position on e-mail spam(CNN) With 24 million small businesses in the US alone, that's way too many apples.
Re: ADMIN: Reminder on off-topic threads
On 22/04/2009, at 3:57 PM, Joe Greco wrote: It may not be wise to wait until ARIN allocates 256.0.0.0/8 to someone and everyone chimes in to note that their routers are barfing on that. :-/ Now that *would* be amusing. -- Nathan Ward
