[Nanog-futures] Final bylaws proposal

[Sean Figgins]

  On 10/2/10 10:46 AM, Daniel Golding wrote:
> This really depends on what the mission of the organization is. A 
> vehicle to do NANOG conferences? A way of hosting mailing lists? Or 
> something a bit more ambitious that addresses the need for a 
> professional organization for network engineering in North America?

While I would be happy if we were looking at NewNOG to be a professional 
organization, these ideas seemed to be pretty well rejected by pretty 
much everyone.
> The state of network engineering education is truly abysmal. From what 
> I can tell, there are no reasonable undergraduate programs. 
I agree, but I would not hire someone for an inter-networking job based 
on a college degree or professional affiliation.  If anything, I have a 
bias against college graduates and especially if they have any kind of 
degree based on computers or MIS.  Especially MIS.  Engineering degrees 
are almost as bad, but at least most engineers are trained to think for 
themselves.  Most other programs are indoctrinating the students to 
thing a specific way.  I don't care for new employees that thing they 
know what is best.  I REALLY don't want that from a fresh-out-of-college 
employee that knows nothing.
> As far as the bylaws in general - I think Steve Gibbard has done a 
> wonderful job, just as he's always done for NANOG, with little thanks 
> and absolutely no recognition. He's not the kind of guy that gets a 
> special colored badge at conferences or who gets a lot of thanks from 
> the podium, but every few years when we really need him, he's there 
> for all of us and he always delivers. If anyone here is volunteering 
> to help him, this would be the right time to step up.
I volunteered to help.  I am available any time to help with this type 
of stuff.  Just don't ask for my opinion, then ignore me.

Again, no offense meant to anyone that worked hard to put this 
together.  I know everyone worked and tried hard.

  -Sean