Hi,
(please see inline)
On Thu, 2 Jun 2022, Michele Neylon - Blacknight via anti-abuse-wg wrote:
Jeroen
RIPE policy is not decided by a vote or astro-turfing.
Exactly, new policies can in fact be blocked by 2 or 3 individuals. Even
with bogus arguments.
And there is a certain group of people that always ensures that, if the
status quo is somehow at stake.
The astro-turfing argument is the most bogus argument i've seen over the
years in these lists.
The policy process is expected/defined to be inclusive, but when someone
talks about some possible changes in other communities, and new people do
really come to this community to voice their opinion, then those
newcomers that support policy changes are labelled as "astro-turfers",
just because they don't share the views of the dominant "policy-making"
group.
Also what you are proposing is over simplistic and would be impossible to
operationalise without bankrupting the NCC.
That script is getting older and older.
After the astro-turfing bit, then it comes the NCC's "armageddon"
argument....... Boring.
Cheers,
Carlos
What is "abusive traffic"?
Who decides what is or is not "abusive"?
Who is going to enforce this?
How?
Bear in mind that RIPE does not have the power to fine a member, so that would
have to change. And I can't imagine RIPE's Board or management would want to be
put in that position. I know that most of the members wouldn't want RIPE to
have that kind of power.
Now if you want to run your own network and impose those kind of sanctions on
your own users you are free to do so.
Also if you want to effect change then you should do research into why things
are the way they are now and who you are dealing with and where they are coming
from.
Regards
Michele
--
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your
subscription options, please visit:
https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/anti-abuse-wg
