North American Network Operators Group

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

[OT] Re: Banned on NANOG

  • From: nanog gonan
  • Date: Fri Dec 03 11:39:49 2004
  • Comment: DomainKeys? See
  • Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024;; b=3wA4qhhwh5OP+BeYTvqT2N/T8q/RMS2aEXwjSGqe+3VzPJCwKbBwWrXdvj585Sz3wN5Xj3BPhgyeeVSBC2aE/PShrqFH1EONXMZe77SiYWhwceh5rkRVVAMIIzRPwEBEE2Qy61Ietcvh9UuP3VpjaUBr+KaKj9ETq9b6yW4AaUI= ;

On 3 Dec 2004, Paul Vixie wrote:

> on the one hand, thank you for your kind words. 

You're welcome.  I appreciate you helping raise the
clue level of the list.

> on the other hand, susan's warnings to me were
> absolutely called for, as i was off in the weeds a
> little bit TOO often. 

That's fine.  Many of us have been warned and stopped
the activity that prompted the warning.  Permament
bannishment of you would not be fine.  This is what
I'm talking about.

> feels that there are presently too many rules, and
> too high an "S", and not enough "N", then they'll
> presumably "vote with their feet" (or cause the
> to become more relaxed.)

No one is saying lower the S and raise the N.  In fact
I was saying the opposite.  Removal of the clue-heavy
is lowering the S in concert with the warnings which
lower the N.  Simple math tells us that the overall
effect isn't to increase the S/N ratio.

On Thu, 2 Dec 2004, william(at) wrote:

: I think to be more fair it would be good if
: suspensions were not permanent but for period of
: (with period doubling or tripling on subsequent
: suspensions if it happens). At least people will not
: be as upset when they are suspended and know its
: a period for them to calm down and do more reading
: nanog then posting.

This is a good idea for the N crowd ;-) for some
measure of N.  However it doesn't fit folks like randy
and Paul.  randy almost always keeps his posts short
(to the point of too short) and on topic. (I keep
referencing these two because they're the only ones
I'm aware of.  I'm absolutely sure there're more).

I ask that the methodology of bannishment be posted to
the list, so we're all aware of the consequences of
too much OT.  Is it permanent banishment or a
procedure similar to the one that William suggests? 
How many warnings get one banished?  Is it a certain
number of warnings over a time period or for all time?
 Are the rules set in stone or do they change with
time to adapt to the situation at hand?

I ask this because I, like many others, value this
list's information greatly and don't want to see those
that I've learned so much from over the years have to
go elsewhere.

Thank You.

Do you Yahoo!? 
Meet the all-new My Yahoo! - Try it today!