From: John Huston (jhuston@xxxxxxxxxxx)
Date: Tue Feb 20 2001 - 14:58:16 GMT-3
Any chance those that want to continue this thread could build their own
dist. list and not copy the ccielab@groupstudy.com address? Same way
might be said for lab swap dates?
John Huston
Systems Engineer
A+ N+ CCDP, CNE, CCDP, MCSE
Choice Solutions, LLC
245 N. Waco, Suite 501
Wichita, KS 67202
(316) 761-2486 (Cell Phone)
(316) 264-4766 (Office)
(316) 264-8386 (Fax)
email: jhuston@choicesolutionsllc.com
-----Original Message-----
From: Tyler Pomerhn [mailto:tpomerhn@cisco.com]
Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2001 9:39 AM
To: Lawrence Dwyer, IP Infrastructure
Cc: ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: RE: Number of new CCIE's (off topic)
I would disagree with the generic "cisco@groupstudy.com" being the ONLY
list for "off topic" posts. Clearly, the CCIE discussion we were having
falls under the heading of "CCIE only" and not "Cisco in general."
Nobody going for their CCNP is interested in this thread.
IMNSHO, if we're to get rid of this past discussion, then we should also
be required to get rid of all "LAB SWAP" messages. I guarantee those
piss me off way more than anyone is pissed about the truth of mine. With
every lab swap message, I see another reason not to complain for an
instant about the supposed "backlog situation."
Also, in going over my inbox, there were over two dozen posts that were
off topic. I don't see complaints about the "CCIE Design" question or
others... why not? Is it just because I'm taking an "unpopular" stance?
tp
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Lawrence Dwyer, IP Infrastructure [mailto:dwyer@torrentnet.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2001 10:38 AM
> To: Tyler Pomerhn; Hardin Les - SMTP; ccielab@groupstudy.com
> Subject: Re: Number of new CCIE's (off topic)
>
>
>
>
> Actually Tyler, I would disagree, this list was intentionally
> setup for only
> for people having passed the written to prepare for the
> technical details of
> the Lab. The "nonsense" you mention is supposed to be the
> only traffic on
> this list, with maybe an exception for lab dates. The generic list
> (cisco@groupstudy.com) is for the certification related
> topics, this is now
> called the professional/technical list. The purpose of the
> lists is really
> up to Paul.
>
> Larry
>
> Tyler Pomerhn wrote:
>
> > There's a VERY easy way to not be bothered by these
> emails... create a
> > filter. The subject clearly says "Off Topic."
> >
> > While this IS a list for lab study, it's also a list for Cisco
> > Certification-related topics. As the numerous responses to this list
> > attest, this is a topic of much interest to all concerned,
> and I find it
> > to be a refreshing debate in the chaos of "OSPF is keeping
> my ISDN line
> > up because I don't have ip ospf demand-circuit" configured"
> nonsense...
> >
> > tp
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: nobody@groupstudy.com
[mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com]On Behalf Of
> > Hardin Les - SMTP
> > Sent: Thursday, February 15, 2001 2:49 PM
> > To: Tyler Pomerhn; John A Field
> > Cc: Mark Lewis; brian@andyandbrian.com; ccielab@groupstudy.com
> > Subject: RE: Number of new CCIE's (off topic)
> >
> >
> > Hey folks,
> >
> > No disrespect intended as you all make good, mostly valid,
> > points, but I
> > think everyone interested in this subject should write Cisco (or
your
> > Congressperson), find a chat room, and go have a good group
> > chat. The rest
> > of us would like to discuss technical matters. Thank you.
> >
> > Les
> >
> >
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 10:28:54 GMT-3