[AusNOG] AUSNOG in the news

[Paul Wilkins]

But it does make a fundamental difference to the nature of the list, if
journalists can attribute quotes without getting clearance from the
authors. It might be ok or it might not, but there is a clear difference
between a private conversation between peers, and a public forum. Me
personally, I'll be dotting my i's and crossing my t's. This spoils the ebb
and flow and free exchange of ideas, and will mean people are more
conservative in what they post.

Kind regards

Paul Wilkins

On 1 October 2015 at 09:27, Chris Gibbs <chris.t.gibbs at gmail.com> wrote:

> I find the information in the archives a great reference when I start
> researching a new topic.
>
> Most of the information isn't controversial and I would hate to see nog
> closed to a private membership model.
>
> As mentioned there is already a charter that is enforced. People always
> have the option to not reply-all and state their 'private' correspondence
> off-list.
>
> On 1 October 2015 at 09:23, Jacob Gardiner <jacob at jacobgardiner.com>
> wrote:
>
>> On 30 September 2015 at 5:52:26 pm, Mark Smith (markzzzsmith at gmail.com)
>> wrote:
>>
>> With >2000 subscribers, hiding the archive isn't going to really be all
>> that effective at preventing posts from leaking.
>>
>> Agreed, however you can have a list charter/rules/terms and conditions
>> which your subscription is subject to. You can’t do effectively the same a
>> public facing archive.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> AusNOG mailing list
>> AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net
>> http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> AusNOG mailing list
> AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net
> http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ausnog.net/pipermail/ausnog/attachments/20151001/6e3eadbc/attachment.html>