[190069] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: NANOG67 - Tipping point of community and sponsor bashing?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (William Herrin)
Tue Jun 14 17:05:48 2016
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
X-Really-To: <nanog@nanog.org>
In-Reply-To: <CADn4PSiSqk23HxhCDrG=nTYHf1ZF8UM+c-r-mh83zj1Ec9sUPQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: William Herrin <bill@herrin.us>
Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2016 17:05:19 -0400
To: Daniel Golding <dgolding@gmail.com>
Cc: NANOG list <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 12:30 PM, Daniel Golding <dgolding@gmail.com> wrote:
>> "If a presentation will name a particular vendor, that vendor should receive
>> an advance
>> draft so that their reps are prepared to speak at the mic about their
>> intentions. "
>
> One of the least savory aspects of the technical press and industry analyst
> worlds is something called pre-pub review. That's where big vendors pay you
> to see stuff before its printed, so they can attempt to censor it. It
> happens all the time, and you never know about it.
Hi Daniel,
That's quite a bit further than anything I suggested. My notion was
that after the presentation has been accepted, the mentioned vendors
receive a copy... not so they can attempt to squelch it but so that
they can respond when the presentation is given.
Besides, which among you would dare try to squelch a NANOG
presentation? Y'all are well familiar with the Streisand Effect.
Regards,
Bill
--
William Herrin ................ herrin@dirtside.com bill@herrin.us
Owner, Dirtside Systems ......... Web: <http://www.dirtside.com/>
