Put part of Google on 69/8 (was Re: 69/8...this sucks)

Thu Mar 13 22:00:27 UTC 2003

Can you and he please take the gender debate off-list?

Thanks,

Owen

--On Wednesday, March 12, 2003 17:36 -0800 JC Dill <nanog at vo.cnchost.com> 
wrote:

>
> Miss Rothschild wrote:
>> On 2003-03-11-21:01:00, JC Dill <nanog at vo.cnchost.com> wrote:
>>>> (Note to Mr. Dill, this is not intended to pick on you specifically,
>>>> it's just a convenient place to butt in)
>>>
>>> Ahem.  It's _MS._ Dill, thank you.
>>
>> Please post with a gender-specific name if you want to take offense
>> when mis-identified.
>
> It is offensive to many people (both male and female) when someone
> automatically assumes that an "unknown" person is male.  Especially since:
>
>       Females aged 2 and up accounted for 50.4 percent of U.S.
>       Internet users in May, edging out their male counterparts,
>       according to New York-based Internet research firms Media
>       Metrix and Jupiter Communications
>
>       [...]
>
>       At Dulles-based America Online Inc., the nation's biggest
>       online services company, 52 percent of its 23.2 million
>       subscribers worldwide are women.
>
>       [...]
>
>       Some scholars believe the new-found gender parity is just
>       another reflection of the social changes of the past few
>       decades, when men and women found themselves on more equal
>       footing. "That distinction has disappeared, and it is a
>       huge revolution in society," says Michael Maccoby, an
>       anthropologist and psychoanalyst.
>
> <http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A137-2000Aug9?language=printer>
>
> It is doubly offensive when you opine that I have an obligation to
> create and use [1] a gender-specific name solely to make things easier
> for you and other sexist jerks^W men^W^W induh^H^Hividuals.  What would
> you do if my name was Pat or Chris?  Or if YOUR name was Pat or Chris?
>
>>> Sure you can.  You just need content unimportant enough that no one
>>> (the end users on a network that is still blocking 69/8, AND the
>>> networks that put up the sacrificial target host on a 69/8 IP) is
>>> truly hurt if the connection fails, but important enough that the
>>> failure will lead to the broken networks being fixed and clue being
>>> distributed.
>>
>> How do I configure my routers and web servers for that?
>
> ObNanog:  Assuming you don't work at Google, if you aren't blocking 69/8
> then your network will not be harmed in any way by the implementation of
> this proposal.  Thus you need to do nothing special at all.  OTOH, if
> you are improperly blocking 69/8, obviously you need to fix that when
> you configure your "routers and web servers" (sic).
>
>>> I'm suggesting that Google explain why they are doing this on a page
>>> linked off their homepage.  If this is done, people ARE going to
>>> notice, and ARE going to find out why.  When it is widely
>>> publicised, it WILL be noticed even more.
>>
>> Last I checked, Google was a for-profit business, not a charity house.
>> I'm not sure how doing something that will make them look dumb, and
>> cost them in valuable ad revenue, etc is in their best interests.
>> Perhaps you could fill me in here.
>
> If you don't work at Google, then this is none of your concern.
>
>>> p.s.  Please don't cc me on replies, or on replies to replies, etc.
>>
>> We have seen time after time that the propagation delays on the NANOG
>> list, most likely resultant from sub-optimal postfix/majordomo
>> configuration and/or an overloaded box, make it unsuitable for
>> realtime communications.  With this in mind, I have taken the liberty
>> of cc'ing you in my reply, despite your request to the contrary.
>
> I have no urgent need for your reply, I am happy to wait until I receive
> email from the list.  I politely made my request very clear, both in my
> headers and in the body of my email.  You responded by taking extra
> steps to do the exact opposite of what I politely requested.  Then you
> have the gall to flame me for my polite request.  This was very rude of
> you.
>
>> If duplicate messages cluttering your inbox are causing you much
>> grief,
>
> They are just an annoyance, as is being mistakenly referred to as a
> male.  Since you seem to think that these annoyances must be accepted as
> part of participating on the net, be prepared to be referred to as Miss
> Rothschild by me, now and in the future.  What goes around comes around,
> girlfriend.
>
> jc
>
> [1]  JC Dill is my real name.  It is the name on my passport and other
> official documents.
>
>
>
>