North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical E-mail addresses and signatures [was: RE: 96.0.0.0/6 reachability testing]
What follows is an off-topic meta-comment, so if you weren't following earlier stuff in this thread, you might as well stop reading. My apologies for furthering this. On Wed, 2 May 2007 [email protected] wrote:
At the risk of hypocracy as well as off-topicness, I'm rather hoping people don't follow this advice. There are a few well-known people on this list whose employment situations and other affiliations don't need much explanation for anybody who has been following the industry closely. There are many more NANOG posters who aren't so well known. Some of these people post to the list a lot, often making assertions without evidence to back them up, and without enough information about who the poster is to figure out whether they're speaking from inside knowledge or relevant experience, whether they work for somebody with a strong stake in the issue under discussion, or or whether they are most likely just making stuff up. I'd much rather see messages with .signatures full of legalese at the end (generally after I've stopped reading anyway), than messages sent with less information about the poster's identity. I realize I'm following my own advice here, largely due not having changed my mailing list configurations after a period of unstable employment a few years ago. -Steve Gibbard Network Architect Packet Clearing House www.pch.net Speaking for myself, not for my employer, and not for any NANOG-related committees I've been on in the past.
|