North American Network Operators Group

Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

Re: FW: Behind the scenes...

  • From: Ehud Gavron
  • Date: Sat Feb 22 14:24:00 1997

Jim, in a purely communist/fascist way, let me
explicitly tell you once again.

This is the NANOG list.  The O is for "Operations." You know, ops.  
Operations.  O.P.E.R.A.T.E.  To work.  Stuff.  That works.

Unlike you.


ob nanog stuff: SPRINT's {broken} confederation
	stuff was screwing us up at Anaheim.  It
	would record one flap at the border as
	2-3 flaps (depending ;) in the core.
	That meant 2 real flaps = dampening.
	We finally got them to fix it... your
	mileage may vary. (fix = turn off)

p.s. Read on if you want to chuckle lightly

>From: 	Jim Fleming[SMTP:[email protected]]
>Sent: 	Saturday, February 15, 1997 11:32 AM
>To: 	'New Newdom'
>Subject: 	Behind the scenes...

>For over 20 years I have been designing serious
>online information systems. I was fortunate to

	"Serious" information systems?  I've never
	seen an information system crack a joke.
	In fact, they haven't even been called 
	information systems but for the last ten

>spend much of that time at AT&T Bell Laboratories
>as an employee and a consultant. I am proud of
>the fact that I was able to help launch the Videotex
>industry and that some of the technology that AT&T
>patented on my behalf was used in the early Prodigy

	You "help[ed] launch"?  You mean you pushed
	a button?  Did you launch or not launch?
	I helped launch the internet industry.  My
	industry makes yours obsolete.  Does this
	mean you have no credibility, oh, Father
	O' Obsolete VideoTex?

>For the past couple of years, I have become more
>involved in the behind the scenes activity of the
>Internet. Like many people, I have used the facilities

	Behind the scenes?  Which backroom cabal
	let you in?  You mean THIS mailing list?
	Com-priv?  Ietf?  Isoc?  Which of these
	open lists, open discussions, or closed
	contract negotiations make you think you
	are privy to ANY behind the scenes, as it

>for many years without much concern for who handled
>the governance needed to keep the network moving in
>a positive direction that benefits all people on earth
>and does not discriminate and degenerate like many
>societies on earth.

	The desire not to discriminate is not a goal
	of the Internet.  Perhaps you are confusing
	'The Internet' with 'The Constitution.'

>I am disappointed to report that the behind the scenes
	Thank you for sharing your feelings.  Of
	course they hold zero weight.  Facts and
	figures, my deluded comrade, not feelings.

>Internet of 1997 looks more like a communist/fascist
	"Looks more like"???  IS IT or IS IT NOT?

>republic than the democratic system in the U.S. that
>helped to create the Internet. In my opinion, this is

	Your opinion has Opinion.Credibility==0.  See
	above under the section where I helped launch
	the Internet.

>partly because a few individuals have been allowed to
>rise to positions of visibility and power without the
>normal checks and balances that are present in a

	Normal checks and balances that are present in
	a democracy?  *puff*   *puff*

	You mean Waco?  Ruby Ridge?  Whitewater?  
	No >10-round-weapons?  No legalized pot despite
	voters' clear referenda?  Amendment against flag
	desecration?  Civil Forfeiture?  War on drugs?
	Holding Noriega without trial after kidnapping
	him from his sovereign territory?

	Which of these is your deluded self hoping to
	aspire to turn the internet into?

>We now have a situation where the so-called "leaders"
	We?  Are you part of this back-scene stuff,
	this evil communist/fascist conspiracy?

>of the Internet support people who run around "blacklisting"
>and denying service to people at the drop of a hat. We

	Outright lie. Not worth dignifying with response.

>see the U.S. Government, via the NSF, funding people
>who are clearly the Internet equivalent of the mafia. We

	Valueless opinion.  Not worth ...

>see prominent Internet societies endorsing people who
>openly and publicly suggest that people's parents be
>"killed with fire axes". We see those groups claiming
>to have the support of the Whitehouse, which I doubt

	White House is two words, both capitalized.

>endorses such violence. The list goes on.

>When I first observed this situation, I will admit that I
      8                                9                 10
>was naive. I assumed that society would see these
>problems and quickly correct these situations. I am
>disappointed to report that not only is this not happening,
>it is getting worse.

>It appears that the only solution for rational adults

	You haven't identified a problem.  You haven't
	identified ANY solutions.  It's premature at
	this point to identify "the only solution" 
	unless you have the brain of a cabbage or

>(especially in the U.S.) is to turn and walk away. As
>this happens, the problem increases, because, what
>remains are these ego-maniac dictators who now infect

	Egomania is one word.  Egomaniac is a noun.
	Egomaniacal is the adjective you might use.

>the young people launching their careers in the tele-
>communications industry. Some of these young people
>then become ISPs, capture the attention of the public,
>and continue to propogate a system that will clearly
>lead to large scale social problems around the world.

	Sounds pretty capitalistic and free-market
	economy to me.  Lead on.

>Another solution is to create a new Internet that is
	Wait.  You just told us "The only solution."
	Now you tell us "Another solution..."
	I think you're about 6% short of a 7% solution.

>"rooted" in democratic governments that have served
>great countries like the U.S. for many years. It is
>somewhat ironic that such a new system would have
>to be created as an alternative to the dictators currently
>being funded by the U.S. taxpayers via NSF grants
>and non-profit, tax-avoiding, companies. The system
>would also have to be created in the face of wide-spread
>opposition from young people who have already been
>polluted to think that everything the U.S. does is not
>in their interest, except for their tuition and salaries
>paid via government grants.

	Ah.  So you "Old Person" know it all, but 
	'young people' (no stratification listed)
	know nothing.  That's great, Jimmy.

>To create a new Internet, new servers and networks
>are not required. What is required is democractic
>governance. Because I believe in the U.S. system
>of democracy and I truely believe that 99.9% of
                  13   ^   ^^^^^^^

	Truly has no E in it.  Your beliefs have
	no foundation.  Share facts and figures,
	not your BELIEF in things.

>society wants to "do the right thing", I still have

	Read Locke.  Read Milton.  That which society
	DOES _IS_ the right thing.  QED.  Prima Facie.
	All that latin jazz.  Go read.  It's good for
	you. Reading Is Fun'amental.

>hope that democratic societies will take a hard
>look behind the scenes of the Internet to see the
>"society" that is pulling the strings. I have faith that
>the real society and real governments will soon
>step forward to cut the ties to the dictators and
>their societies. This will help to ensure that children

	Real world, Jim Flaming.  Jim Flaming,
	real world.  When you have cleared dictators
	and their societies from the REAL WoRLD, you
	can then talk about it on the net.
	Maybe you can 'help launch' a new world.
>and adults everywhere have a chance to enjoy
>the wonderful resources that the Internet can
>provide in a truely democratic Internet society (small s).

>Thank you for your time...

	*puff*  "That's good shit, man."

	You used the word "I" 14 times.  Maybe it's
	timey YOU spent less time on YOU and more
	time realizing you're a nutcase kook who
	has no clue about what a society is, what
	the internet is, how the world is, how 
	things are run, and how to change them.
	It's called frustration.  Live it.

>Jim Fleming
>Unir Corporation

>[email protected]
>[email protected] (EDNS/IPv8)

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -