nanog mailing list archives
Re: *tap tap* is this thing on?
From: Larry Sheldon <larrysheldon () cox net>
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2015 12:21:02 -0500
On 10/25/2015 17:56, Brielle Bruns wrote:
This spam flood is kinda hilarious in a way. Any idea why no one with mod or admin privs for the mailing list has bothered to step in and deal with this?
You can find people who have been convinced that NANOG is fundamentally pro-abuse because to many of them, it is revenue traffic.
-- sed quis custodiet ipsos custodes? (Juvenal)
Current thread:
- *tap tap* is this thing on? Brielle Bruns (Oct 26)
- Re: *tap tap* is this thing on? Josh Luthman (Oct 26)
- Re: *tap tap* is this thing on? Brielle Bruns (Oct 26)
- Re: *tap tap* is this thing on? Josh Luthman (Oct 26)
- Re: *tap tap* is this thing on? Marcin Cieslak (Oct 26)
- Re: *tap tap* is this thing on? Brielle Bruns (Oct 26)
- Re: *tap tap* is this thing on? Jim Popovitch (Oct 26)
- Re: *tap tap* is this thing on? Chris Knipe (Oct 26)
- Re: *tap tap* is this thing on? Tom Taylor (Oct 26)
- Re: *tap tap* is this thing on? Josh Luthman (Oct 26)
- Re: *tap tap* is this thing on? Bob Evans (Oct 26)
- Re: *tap tap* is this thing on? Larry Sheldon (Oct 26)
- Re: *tap tap* is this thing on? Brielle Bruns (Oct 26)
- Re: *tap tap* is this thing on? Rich Kulawiec (Oct 27)
- Re: *tap tap* is this thing on? Brielle Bruns (Oct 26)
- Re: *tap tap* is this thing on? Joe Abley (Oct 26)
- Re: *tap tap* is this thing on? Brielle Bruns (Oct 26)
- Re: *tap tap* is this thing on? Andrew Kirch (Oct 26)
- Re: *tap tap* is this thing on? Brielle Bruns (Oct 26)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- Re: *tap tap* is this thing on? Dovid Bender (Oct 28)