discuss AT lists.opennicproject.org
Subject: Discuss mailing list
List archive
- From: Peter Green <peter AT greenpete.co.uk>
- To: <discuss AT lists.opennicproject.org>
- Subject: Re: [opennic-discuss] Policy proposal for removal of non-respondingT2servers
- Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2012 22:00:09 +0100
- Mail-reply-to: <peter AT greenpete.co.uk>
We seem to be straying off into irrelevant territory here...
This isn't about punishment or praise, it's about house keeping.
Lets stay on topic and decide how we deal with servers that don't respond
for X amount of time in a technical way. There is after all no point in
advertising a server for use if it doesn't work.
If praise and punishment must come into it, maybe we can save that for
another day?
Maybe get back to what Jeff was initially talking about.
Peter
On 15.08.2012 21:34, mike wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
I understand the intention here. However, from a human perspective,
the "guilty until proven innocent" tone of it could be a strong turn
off to potential new comers, myself included, I think that would have
made me have second thoughts.
Think about someone who may know little about DNS to begin with, and
who's about to make a fairly substantial commitment in time and
equipment, for free, and right off the bat he's feeling threatened
that it may end up being for nothing.
Maybe it's just me, but I generally feel that giving people positive
re-enforcement, challenging them to do more and better, and rewarding
them, most often works better than threatening them with punishment.
On 08/15/2012 02:49 PM, David Norman wrote:
Example - the list doesn't show you until your server has passed 95% of
testing for two straight weeks. If it goes down for 2 hours/days/weeks,
it automatically un-lists, even if the maintainer communicated
downtime.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJQLAfgAAoJEA7EcEr0emgfSZcH/1YOs+s8nzvmAJAW0ojkQ5tk
Hi9ycpGhcOrY+58eQvIzUZACw+2zKNmT9x11gLgyqpatOzTuUL8yn9MtKf51QJ1M
3ecmSbBEhOmG3Tg2krKf/gclaaRGsBROF3KzUsHbDNLRNI4NUTMqtRJJbhvXUsZ2
5JnPmySm+N9GN3mMBAMsnjPbEF5W+FrpNZbSZk8qmpyQkaD3Znp7SumhMm840DqD
HlIxPv6ZoMC9pBycxoLGG946p5jfjC/IxnuOaMTErGT/PY57PPD8AuaiPx6bLJyL
u5Evk0LN/DNe1BX5vJpwV6CelqyS/H6EYpmou7VzsMxMGz8xykIMqIHGLyok0Uw=
=KmDl
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--------
You are a member of the OpenNIC Discuss list.
You may unsubscribe by emailing
discuss-unsubscribe AT lists.opennicproject.org
- Re: [opennic-discuss] Policy proposal for removalofnon-respondingT2servers, (continued)
- Re: [opennic-discuss] Policy proposal for removalofnon-respondingT2servers, mike, 08/16/2012
- Re: [opennic-discuss] Policy proposal for removalofnon-respondingT2servers, Sam Dodrill, 08/16/2012
- Re: [opennic-discuss] Policy proposal for removalofnon-respondingT2servers, Jeff Taylor, 08/16/2012
- Re: [opennic-discuss] Policy proposal for removalofnon-respondingT2servers, Falk Husemann, 08/16/2012
- Re: [opennic-discuss] Policy proposal for removalofnon-respondingT2servers, Jeff Taylor, 08/16/2012
- Re: [opennic-discuss] Policy proposal for removalofnon-respondingT2servers, Falk Husemann, 08/16/2012
- Message not available
- Re: [opennic-discuss] Policy proposal for removalofnon-respondingT2servers, Dean Gardiner, 08/16/2012
- Re: [opennic-discuss] Policy proposal for removalofnon-respondingT2servers, Dean Gardiner, 08/16/2012
- Re: [opennic-discuss] Policy proposal for removalofnon-respondingT2servers, Jeff Taylor, 08/16/2012
- Re: [opennic-discuss] Policy proposal forremovalofnon-respondingT2servers, mike, 08/16/2012
- Re: [opennic-discuss] Policy proposal for removal of non-respondingT2servers, Falk Husemann, 08/15/2012
- Re: [opennic-discuss] Policy proposal for removal of non-respondingT2servers, Jeff Taylor, 08/15/2012
- Re: [opennic-discuss] Policy proposal for removal of non-respondingT2servers, Dale, 08/15/2012
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.19.