Thanks Ben Some useful inputs and a few responses.
> On 24 Jan 2022, at 11:35, Ben Maddison <benm@workonline.africa> wrote: > >> > I think that we are conflating two separate problems. Valid comment. > > If the WG chairs are doing their job, astroturfing *should* be a > non-issue. A valid argument ought to be taken as seriously whether it > comes from one individual or one-hundred. > The additional noise that it creates is certainly irritating, but then > so are flies. > We should collectively take a deep breath and ignore it. Noted and agreed. > > The question of affiliation disclosure is, imo, more important. > I believe that the expectation on every list should be the same as at > the microphone at an in person meeting: identity yourself and state your > affiliation before you speak. Spot on! > > If a sender's affiliation is not obvious (From: domain, signature, etc), > then the chairs and/or moderators should challenge them to state it. > Failure[*] to do so should: > A) be an indication to the community (and particularly for the purposes > to considering consensus) that any arguments presented should be > viewed with great skepticism; and > B) be a CoC violation, eventually resulting in a ban. I accept your point - but think it would be better served on subscribing to the mailing list [or to retain your posting rights] rather than on a challenge basis. One post escapes the challenge and then there are claims of favouritism :-) > > In both cases, however, I think that the solution is for readers of the > list to to so critically, rather than for AFRINIC to become an identity > provider. > In any event, seeing someone's passport tells you nought about how their > rent gets paid. Very valid points. > > [*]: > I consider "private individual", "internet community member", "no > hats", etc, to be bogus responses in this context. > It may be important for individuals to make it clear that they are > not speaking on behalf of their employer, but that should not exempt > them from stating who their employer (etc) is. > For example, I work for Workonline Communications (AS37271). The > above is my personal opinion. > Completely agree. I work for a member, however am not the member representative and hence prefer to use my personal address to distinguish myself from our official representative. It should be obvious from a quick search - but certainly no harm in calling it out specifically! > Cheers, > > Ben
_______________________________________________ Community-Discuss mailing list Community-Discuss@afrinic.net https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
