People being removed from the list and such

Tue Oct 19 04:27:20 UTC 2004

Although I have not yet been censored, I have been warned more than once.
I think, generally, Susan tries to do a good job, and, has a tough task
trying to balance SNR, AUP, and, the general tendencies of this crowd of
engineers.

However, while I don't know the names of all the recent "victims", the ones
I know lead me to believe this is a legitimate request on both counts.

Now, Susan, before you decide that I am off topic, let me point out that
I believe, in good faith, that this is an issue requiring coordination.
Further, I believe that it is an issue affecting the future of the NANOG
list, and, that, the viability of NANOG as a forum _IS_ an operational
issue.

Owen

--On Monday, October 18, 2004 21:20 -0500 "Malayter, Christopher" 
<Christopher.Malayter at tdstelecom.com> wrote:

>
> It has come to my attention that recently several people have been
> censored from posting to the nanog@ list.
>
> I find it a bit unusual that from such an open discussion list that
> membership would be censored without notice and reason to the rest of the
> membership.
>
> I wouldn't normally be the one to post this, but the people who have been
> censored in some cases I believe to be extremely valuable people to the
> list.
>
> My question is this: When people are removed/censored, be it temporary or
> permanent, could we have a notice posted to the membership as to the
> person, reason, and duration?
>
> Also, I realize that this sounds odd, could we add an appeals process?
> The idea of a single person with unilateral control over such a group,
> without taking into consideration the needs and desires of the group,
> does not seem fair.  I believe that there is need for recourse in this
> community for a person who is  removed or censored unfairly.
>
> Regards,
>
> Chris Malayter
> TDS Telecom - Network Services
> Network Management and Operations
> chris.malayter at tdstelecom.com
> Phone: (608) 664-4878
> FAX:	(608) 664-4644
>
>
>

-- 
If this message was not signed with gpg key 0FE2AA3D, it's probably
a forgery.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 186 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20041018/9a2c4473/attachment.sig>