On Fri, 28 Mar 2003, Simon Blake wrote:
I'm picking that Don could blast through the membership and pick 50-100 email addresses that he knows are with operators/ISP's/whatever. Then when a prospect applies, it gets notified to the list, and unless anybody squawks on the list, they get put on.
A "prospect"? It seems you're after some unholy mix of /. and the Mongrel NOG. The list is fine, and Don isn't doing too poor a job of looking after it. I don't think it's fair to ask him to take more responsibility for it than he already has, let alone more work.
Hypothetically, how do you know it's not happening now? Answer, you're reliant on the impeccable good name list admin and his employer. Why shouldn't you continue to rely upon that?
That doesn't quite follow. The list is open now, and you get chucked out if you misbehave. A closed list doesn't work like that.
I'm suggesting that a list member would have to make a fairly compelling case to preclude somebody joining. Otherwise, your request to join will proceed as usual, with just some delay as it gets rubber stamped through the list membership.
Seems pointless then.
So we shouldn't try to fix the s/n ratio, because we might fail?
I'm just objecting to pointless maneouvres that won't fix the s/n ratio, that's all.
I'm proposing a meritocracy. It's entirely in keeping with the Internet spirit.
No, you're proposing a closed club. But anyway... I don't want to continue this discussion. -- Juha Saarinen