Amen! Comms team let us know if there is anything we can do to support you otherwise thanks in advance for fixing this issue. Mehmet On Monday, October 26, 2015, Patrick W. Gilmore <patrick@ianai.net> wrote:
Myth: Andrew’s post has utility to the 10K+ people reading it. (Not watching Twitter makes me braindead? really? Yeah, it’s 2015. Get up-to-date, should have sent a snapchat. Duh.)
Fact: Andrew should probably just un-sub since he finds NANOG useless. That would actually provide utility to the rest of us.
I repeat: The UN-PAID VOLUNTEERS on the Communications Committee do a great job. If you think you can do better, please please please volunteer. Otherwise, simply thank them for doing what you refuse to do and get on with your life.
-- TTFN, patrick
On Oct 26, 2015, at 4:56 PM, Andrew Kirch <trelane@trelane.net <javascript:;>> wrote:
All,
Myth: NANOG supposed to be the gold standard for best practices. Fact: 500 spam messages over the weekend.
Myth: there were no complaints and this issue was raised over the weekend Fact: I raised it this weekend via twitter twice @NANOG, and requested contact from SCNET (NANOG's upstream) trying to find a live person to shut it off.
Myth: blah blah blah social media is a bad way to get ahold of netops/abuse. Fact: Social media is an acceptable way to report abuse. My marketing department certainly knows how to get ahold of me when such an issue occurs. It's 2015, and if you and everyone you know isn't watching twitter I can't help you, because you've gone braindead.
Myth: but you could have reached out to someone else and maybe done something to stop this quickly. Fact: I reached out to several people at ARIN and elsewhere trying to get a live person at NANOG to no avail.
Myth: this is acceptable because NANOG has political clout in the US and elsewhere. Fact: If I was still running the AHBL, NANOG would be it's own private intranet right now.
Andrew