Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez' Office is on NANOG?? Or, what is the policy about sharing email offlist?

Tue Jan 19 11:58:06 UTC 2021

Yeah he did the same dolt act to me to. Just a really bored dolt looking for nonsense with a crush on AOC.

-- 
 J. Hellenthal

The fact that there's a highway to Hell but only a stairway to Heaven says a lot about anticipated traffic volume.

> On Jan 19, 2021, at 00:40, Javier J <javier at advancedmachines.us> wrote:
> 
> 
> you too, why are you emailing me?
> 
> I didn't ask anyone to contact me off list.
> 
>> On Mon, Jan 18, 2021 at 8:53 PM Sam Silvester <sam.silvester at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Archives are browsable by anybody. How do you expect to keep political types out of the discussion?
>> 
>>> On Tue, 19 Jan 2021 at 11:36 am, Javier J <javier at advancedmachines.us> wrote:
>>> I couldn't agree more.
>>> If I want to talk politics, I will go to other places. I use this mailing list to talk about things relevant to technology and operation of networks in North American and other places.
>>> 
>>> - Javier
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> On Mon, Jan 18, 2021 at 4:19 PM Mel Beckman <mel at beckman.org> wrote:
>>>> javier,
>>>> 
>>>> I concur. What we don’t need on Nanog is outside parties deciding to “reign in” our discussions on political grounds!
>>>> 
>>>>  -mel beckman
>>>> 
>>>>> On Jan 18, 2021, at 12:38 PM, Javier J <javier at advancedmachines.us> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> I agree 100%.
>>>>> 
>>>>> I know the emails on this list are public and that is fine.  What I don't appreciate is that now my email address is in some politico's address list because of someone's behavior.
>>>>> 
>>>>> - Javier
>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Mon, Jan 18, 2021 at 3:20 PM Jon Lewis <jlewis at lewis.org> wrote:
>>>>>> There's a world of difference between "don't expect list posts to be 
>>>>>> private to list members" and "don't forward the list to autoresponders."
>>>>>> The stupidity of the latter, if it can be tracked down to who did it, 
>>>>>> should result in their removal from the list, at least until they explain 
>>>>>> what caused them to do that and have undone it.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Mon, 18 Jan 2021, Paul Timmins wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> > The list has public archives. Draw your own conclusions on the policy.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > https://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > On 1/18/21 2:40 PM, Anne P. Mitchell, Esq. wrote:
>>>>>> >>  Not under that impression at all. That's very different from "what is the
>>>>>> >>  policy" - at least in the groups I run, if the policy is "no sharing
>>>>>> >>  offlist" and then someone does, there are consequences for that someone.
>>>>>> >>  Anne
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >>  --
>>>>>> >>  Anne P. Mitchell,  Attorney at Law
>>>>>> >>  Dean of Cyberlaw & Cybersecurity, Lincoln Law School
>>>>>> >>  Author: Section 6 of the CAN-SPAM Act of 2003 (the Federal anti-spam law)
>>>>>> >>  Board of Directors, Denver Internet Exchange
>>>>>> >>  Chair Emeritus, Asilomar Microcomputer Workshop
>>>>>> >>  Former Counsel: Mail Abuse Prevention System (MAPS)
>>>>>> >> 
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>   Jon Lewis, MCP :)           |  I route
>>>>>>   StackPath, Sr. Neteng       |  therefore you are
>>>>>> _________ http://www.lewis.org/~jlewis/pgp for PGP public key_________
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20210119/f8cece38/attachment.html>