[84814] in North American Network Operators' Group
Why is it necessary to "tag" on-topic news cites?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (jc dill)
Mon Sep 26 03:23:53 2005
Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 00:21:27 -0700
From: jc dill <lists05@equinephotoart.com>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org, nanog-futures@nanog.org
In-Reply-To: <20050926065023.GK8847@overlord.e-gerbil.net>
Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu
Richard A Steenbergen wrote:
> I'm aware of quite a few people who have encouraged said poster to tag his
> off-topic posts for easy filtering, myself included.
A brief cite and quote from a news article discussing the status of
major networks (BellSouth Corp., SBC Communications, Cingular Wireless)
in North America following a huge storm that affected several states is
clearly on-topic for the North American Network Operators Group
discussion list.
> Ideally this material
> belongs in a blog with a comments section,
He has a blog. He posts *many* more links to his blog each day than he
posts to nanog. Since creating his blog, the links he posts to nanog
are, for the most part, on-topic for nanog. Certainly the post that
triggered this discussion was on-topic for nanog.
> or in a seperate mailing list.
> Failing that, it needs to be tagged for easy filtering by those who aren't
> interested.
I'm confused. Can you explain why the ON-TOPIC links he posts somehow
"need to be tagged"?
> Adding a subject tag
> also allows readers to match on the off-topic chatter spawned by these
> posts, not just the original post.
Why is this any different from the off-topic chatter spawned from other
posts?
jc
