North American Network Operators Group
Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

Re: Confidentiality disclaimers, was: GoDaddy DDoS

  • From: Suresh Ramasubramanian
  • Date: Thu Dec 01 22:14:18 2005
  • Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=Xd8VVUW6LMfX9By9jiyLPaq4xrFaMpAafYNKeN7JrpqV/piadFbsA9+DMjw5sr11j5f7DEFZ4/to2ETUAoxlfZrhIZJJZsYGldR5sLb0+uH6eRy3qdBKtCHbffDhvXTZc7ZoqVyL2QPo1H/niqsWCa6YDXzKL1MyhwBS4iLx1AM=
On 12/2/05, Dan Hollis <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> IMO, such disclaimers are incompatible with the nanog ml, anyone posting
> from such disclaimer-encumbered accounts should be forcefully
> unsubscribed. If you can't post from a disclaimer-free account, you
> shouldn't be posting to the list, period.
>

That is the policy on a few linux / linux related mailing lists I am
on (the sort that are just as eager to chase down people who top post
and full quote, for example)

Easily ignorable / tune-out-able though, and the discussions about
this sort of stuff consume far more bits than the actual disclaimer.

--
Suresh Ramasubramanian ([email protected])