Building a moderated nanog (was Re: hm..)

Tue Nov 18 19:06:16 UTC 1997

Actually this list has been really good compared to some others. I think someone
is
doing this on purpose to limit the list and basically destroy the good
communications
that develop here. I generally lurk and learn more than stating my opinion and
would not be to happy with the demise of the list...

Henry R. Linneweh

James Rishaw wrote:

> Something else that needs to be considered is blowing up the list (making
> smaller, distributed lists).  It takes hours sometimes for mail to go through
> the distribution.
>
> Sometimes, I'll post, and I'll get four, five, six replies before I see my
> post to the list bounce back this way.  It takes hours. :-(  Too long for a
> list where sometimes time-critical information is discussed.
>
> </imho>
>
> Tim Ramsey wrote:
> > Tim Harrison said:
> > >I just got a whole bunch more too.  nanog being subscibed to different
> > >mailing lists.
> >
> > >Someone *is* playing with us.
> >
> > <delurk>
> >
> > Perhaps it is time to moderate nanog.  Send postings to a team of
> > moderators to screen for content before being approved for the list.  How
> > strictly the screening would be applied and who would moderate would be up
> > to the list.
> >
> > I can host such a list on K-State's Listserv server.  Listserv has all the
> > tools needed to make this work.
> >
> > Is there any interest in this?
> >
> > Tim Ramsey                          tar at ksu.edu
> > Sr. UNIX System Administrator       (785) 532-3742
> > Computing and Network Services
> > Kansas State University
> >
>
> --
> james g.k. rishaw  dal/efnet:gavroche  __    IAGnet/CIC/netILLINOIS Backoffice
> DID:216.902.5455 FAX:216.623.3566      \/            800.637.4IAGx5455
>           "The man who doesn't read good books has no advantage
>               over the man who can't read them." - Mark Twain

--
™¢4i1å