|
North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical RE: NANOG Changes
It should be noted that Michel is speaking only for himself, and not for the nanog-reform group (and I haven't seen any concensus among the nanog-reform group yet on the draft bylaws that Michel is referring to). I am also speaking only for myself on this. I'd been waiting to hear that the nanog-futures list had actually been created before urging that this discussion move there. Since it sounds like it has been, now would probably be a good time to move the discussion. -Steve On Fri, 18 Feb 2005, Michel Py wrote: > > > Paul Vixie wrote: > > I am uncomfortable having folks from the nanog-reform > > community accepting responsibility for provisional > > moderation (a form of interim governance), > > So am I. However, I will point out that these individuals have acted > with precipitation (which is the correct term to use when something > happens in a matter of days) and without any kind of endorsement or > mandate from the nanog-reform community. See below about the position of > the nanog-reform community. > > > > Perception isn't *actually* reality, > > [for those not reading nanOg-reform, this is a > hidden reference to my yesterday's post] > > I could live with Paul's phrasing, as long as it is understood in the > context I wrote it: > > > but in politics (which this is) the difference between > > perception and reality is just not worth discussing. > > > For the record, with regard to mailing-list moderation (BTW, we call > this mailing-list administration now), the collective position of the > nanog-reform community can be found in two places: > > 1. http://www.nanog-reform.org/ > > > List Administration Group > > Ideally, we would like to see the NANOG mailing list run itself, > > with peer pressure or self-policing used to keep things on topic. > > Since we recognize that there may at some point be cases where > > that doesn't work, there should also be a list administration > > group with the ability to deal with extreme cases. The list > > administrators should be selected by the board, and should follow > > policies set by the board. They should be people with an > > understanding of network operations and what constitutes on-topic > > and appropriate discussions. Attempts should be made to steer > > discussions back on-topic, and to determine whether somebody is > > really being disruptive, before any enforcement action is taken. > > There should be thorough public records of any enforcement actions > > 2. > http://www.nanog-reform.org/cgi-bin/twiki/view/NANOGReform/DraftBylaws > > > 7.2.2 Mailing List Administrator Selection > > The steering committee will select the administrators of the NANOG > > mailing list (discussed further in 8.1.2). > > 8.1.2 Mailing List Administration The nanog-l will be administered > > and minimally moderated by a panel selected by the Steering Committee. > > > > William Allen Simpson wrote: > > Please, the interim-moderators should moderate, and the > > bylaws drafters should draft, and they should be separate. > > It's the usual difference between the Chair and the Editor > > (or Raporteur, or Recording Secretary). > > Being one of the "bylaws drafters" I agree with this. > > Michel. > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Steve Gibbard [email protected] +1 415 717-7842 (cell) http://www.gibbard.org/~scg +1 510 528-1035 (home)
|