
Tim writes:
It is not a strong leap of the imagination to believe that NANOG, the vocal majority, supports selective route-filtering to control routing table growth and was very aggressive to oppress the those whom dared to stand alone and challenge there will.
Please keep in mind that as in *any* group, NANOG included, by virture of allowing a few dominate voices to represent the group, does bear responsibility for the perception others view the group.
You say the "vocal majority" in the first paragraph and then the "few dominate voices" in the second paragraph. Which is it? If you had said a "vocal minority" in the first paragraph, it would make your comments much more consistent. -- Stan | Academ Consulting Services |internet: sob@academ.com Olan | For more info on academ, see this |uucp: {mcsun|amdahl}!academ!sob Barber | URL- http://www.academ.com/academ |Opinions expressed are only mine.

Stan asks:
You say the "vocal majority" in the first paragraph and then the "few dominate voices" in the second paragraph. Which is it? If you had said a "vocal minority" in the first paragraph, it would make your comments much more consistent.
Actually that is a good question, but I disagree that the comment is inconsistant, but maybe unclear.... here is why IMHO only, most list forums such as this fine one and others are often dominated by a few very active participants.... this is what I referred to as the "vocal majority". You are right, this term is misleading, but now we are discussing symantics and not ideas. Back to ideas...... It is suprising to learn, however, that NANOG does not support selective route filtering.... it has always been my perception, based on the strong words of support and the 'void of support' for the small opposition, that the majority (what and whoever that is) of NANOG supports selective route filtering and those who spoke in opposition were 'few' and 'isolated'. Take care, Tim
participants (2)
-
sob@academ.com
-
Tim Bass