Re: Perhaps it's time to think about enhancements to the NANOG list...?

["james.cutler () consultant com" <james.cutler () consultant com>]

Dave,

I am a regular discourse user these days. I have been a NANOG list participant for at least a quarter of a century. I 
find all the modern forums require examining multiple web pages and do not support gaining any historical perspective 
or assist in correlating various topics into a coherent gestalt. They also require waiting for all the embellishments 
and formatting which html users prize as advantages, even when words, well reasoned or hasty, would serve as well or 
better.

As you might surmise from the forgoing: IT AINT BROKE. DON’T FIX IT. 

Pardon my shouting in my fervent expression of my opinion, but it is important that you hear and consider this.

-
James R Cutler
james.cutler () consultant com

On Mar 20, 2021, at 2:46 PM, David Siegel <arizonagull () gmail com> wrote:
> The board has been thinking about enhancements to the NANOG list for a couple of years now, with the goal of creating 
> a modern interface that the younger generation of engineers will be more comfortable using.
>
> Those of you that have attended recent NANOG members meetings may recall that we are currently beta testing a new 
> community interface called discourse as part of our NANOG modernization strategic initiative.  If it proves out as 
> the new interface, it will support multiple web-based forums, and each forum will feature a fully integrated two-way 
> email interface.  Once in full production, the existing general mailing list will be moved to the platform, and 
> additional topics/mailing-lists will be created.
>
> If you prefer to join a specific forum but continue to use email as you always have, that will be an option and there 
> will be many new topic-specific mailing lists.  Those that wish to use a more modern looking web-based interface for 
> discussion can use that, or anyone can use a hybrid of the two methods in the same forum (email or web-based).
>
> The beta is currently only open to board members, but we expect it to be opened for further beta testing and feedback 
> later this year within the existing community.
>
>
> Dave Siegel
> NANOG board Vice-Chair
>
>
> On Sat, Mar 20, 2021 at 9:57 AM Mike Hammett <nanog () ics-il net <mailto:nanog () ics-il net>> wrote:
> That seems like a reasonable proposal. NANOG-OffTopic, NANOG-Discuss, NANOG-BizDev, NANOG-xyz, something (more more 
> than one something).
>
> The other lists still wouldn't allow promotion, but you could make inquiries and discuss things that don't involve 
> enable or configure.
>
>
>
> -----
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com <http://www.ics-il.com/>
>
> Midwest-IX
> http://www.midwest-ix.com <http://www.midwest-ix.com/>
>
> From: "Eric Kuhnke" <eric.kuhnke () gmail com <mailto:eric.kuhnke () gmail com>>
> To: "Matthew Petach" <mpetach () netflight com <mailto:mpetach () netflight com>>
> Cc: "NANOG" <nanog () nanog org <mailto:nanog () nanog org>>, admins () nanog org <mailto:admins () nanog org>
> Sent: Thursday, March 18, 2021 6:43:41 PM
> Subject: Re: Perhaps it's time to think about enhancements to the NANOG list...?
>
> Perhaps the sales, marketing and 'business development' people who've never typed "enable" or "configure" into a 
> router a single day in their lives might be better served with a dedicated list that is mission focused on bizdev, 
> and not operational issues. 
>
>
>
> On Thu, Mar 18, 2021 at 3:29 PM Matthew Petach <mpetach () netflight com <mailto:mpetach () netflight com>> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Mar 18, 2021 at 10:37 AM Tom Beecher <beecher () beecher cc> wrote:
> CC back to the mailing list for visibility, since I ate the CC list. 
>
> On Thu, Mar 18, 2021 at 1:31 PM Tom Beecher <beecher () beecher cc> wrote:
> Rod-
>
> Please refer to the usage guidelines found here. https://nanog.org/resources/usage-guidelines/ 
> <https://nanog.org/resources/usage-guidelines/>
>
> 14. Posts that encourage or facilitate an agreement about the following subjects are inappropriate: prices, 
> discounts, or terms or conditions of sale; salaries; benefits, profits, profit margins, or cost data; market shares, 
> sales territories, or markets; allocation of customers or territories; or selection, rejection, or termination of 
> customers or suppliers.
>
>  I would tend to agree that while most of your posts to the list are within the guidelines, there have been occasions 
> where a reasonable person could think you might be skirting the line a bit. In this case :
>
> - Your company works as a broker to procure capacity for others. 
> - You sent an email to the list that wording wise would be exactly the same as many of us might send to someone they 
> were looking for capacity from. 
>
> I think most would agree this is pretty clearly against both the usage guidelines and the spirit of what this mailing 
> list is about. 
>
> I would also like to remind you that this list is administered by the NANOG organization. You have no authority to 
> tell others to 'cease and desist', and insult someone as 'underemployed' is also not well tolerated here. 
>
> I have looped in the list admins here. It would probably be a good idea to refrain from future messages that are 
> clearly commercial in nature, or that contain unnecessary insults. 
>
>
>
> If only we had some way to segregate out different topics 
> of interest or disinterest, so that people who weren't interested 
> in questions about bandwidth availability could unsubscribe 
> from those topics, and only subscribe to the topics that *did*
> interest them...
>
> #AFewDaysTooEarly
>
> ^_^;;
>
> Matt
>
>