Talk:Other Operations Groups
From NANOG
The afrinic links are broken becasue the Afrinic site is broken. They know. They are fixing.
--Marty 16:38, 10 August 2006 (GMT)
USENIX charges fees - by your logic, removing. --jzp 11:24, 26 August 2006 (GMT)
Making a consistent style matters more than what it is - if you like one way I suggest pushing all the links that way. Fixed the two outliers here. If you have style guidance, go put it in the style guide - there's been numerous requests for input on the mailing list and none provided. Unless there's conventions and guides, expect anyone on a wiki to go and do it their own way. now that it is open, expect it to get more variant rather than less.
--jzp 11:32, 26 August 2006 (GMT)
I dont care about the style. long as it's consistent.
--Marty 00:00, 27 August 2006 (GMT)
Sheesh!
Content comes first. Style comes second. This is the wiki way.
--Mdillon 14:19, 30 August 2006 (GMT)
Uh, it's both here so follow it or be edited. Was there some point in annoying us?
--Marty 14:05, 30 August 2006 (GMT)
As someone who has around 10 years of experience with Wikis, it is more important to get contributors to provide content, than it is to worry about style. As for getting edited, all content on a wiki is subject to editing. That **IS** the wiki way.
As you probably have noted, there are some people on the wiki who are concerned with style. What is wrong with letting them edit the content into the right style? It's rather like hiring some people to configure routers and some people to get customer signatures on contracts. Works in the real world. Works in wikis too. --Mdillon 14:19, 30 August 2006 (GMT)
Actually, style and content are completely commingled. In some wikis you have a disjoint between data and presentation. Here, for example, one thrust of the main page is to stay tight and not require a ton of click-throughs and scrolling or searching to get to the data. That formatting choice influences the content placement and organization. We're all busy and while yes, wikis are about editing and recombining the contributions, excessive effort on doing so doesn't help anyone. I would rather see more of some folks' assumptions drawn out and expressed.
--jzp 14:48, 16 September 2006 (GMT)
Why not FIRST
What was FIRST deleted?
It is an OTHER OPERATIONS GROUP as the title suggests. Is this page only supposed to contain groups who are endorsed according to some secret criteria?
--Mdillon 13:10, 7 September 2006 (GMT)
Good question, hopefully the deleter will comment. There was expressed some desire to not list organizations that charge fees, though it isn't clear to me what boundaries, if any that represents. IMO this is about resources people need, and the references that exist in the FAQ (or should exist).
--jzp 14:43, 16 September 2006 (GMT)
First isnt network operational, it's security. Second, the recent addition of MENOG seems pointless
without "some" trace of it's existence. Surely there must be something on the web related to them?
open VS closed
To try and head off the expected complaints regarding the recent addition of LINX, I suppect we just have a section on the page for 'member-only' meetings/oganizations. Then some of the previously removed ones could come back.
Perhaps a different page would be warranted if this got too long, and text updated to be clear this is for open-to-all meetings & mailing lists. --jzp 14:16, 16 January 2008 (GMT)
