In message <199509301901.PAA06526@pinch.io.org>, Nigel Allen writes:

Groups like NANOG may find it useful to be listed in the _Encyclopedia of Associations_, a directory of national non-profit groups in the United States, so that journalists, researchers and potential new members can get in touch with you more easily.

I have transcribed the questionnaire that the _Encyclopedia of Associations_ uses to compile its listings, and I would be happy to send a copy to anyone who would like their group listed.

The Encyclopedia of Associations is published by Gale Research Inc. of Detroit, a well-known publisher of reference books. Your local library probably has a copy of the _Encyclopedia of Associations_ that you can look through to see how other progressive groups are listed.

To request a questionnaire, send me e-mail (ndallen@io.org), or contact: Encyclopedia of Associations Gale Research Inc. 835 Penobscot Building Detroit, MI 48226-4094 U.S.A. telephone (313) 961-2242 or 800-877-GALE fax (313) 961-6815

-- Nigel Allen, Toronto, Ontario, Canada ndallen@io.org Web page: http://www.io.org/~ndallen

NANOG has no official spokesperson (unless someone wants Merit to take on that role with the public media) and produces no documents. NANOG is a forum for providers to discuss and hopefully resolve operational issues, but not a policy making body. NANOG has never written any formal decree. IMO: If NANOG starts to try to produce documents, discussion would quickly deteriorate from network operations to petty wording in the documents. The IETF would be more appropriate (if IETF is not already in there) as well as the IETF WGs such as CIDRD, allowing the chair to serve as spokesperson for the WG, hopefully providing draft documents and status of WG documents and any official WG adgenda, but not any personal agenda for the WG. Do we really expect popular media to query IETF Operational Area WGs on their progress and their impact on the Internet? I doubt it. Curtis