[acm-tf] suggestion

On Tue, May 03, 2011 at 04:23:47PM +0100, Brian Nisbet wrote:

> I think this could well be a good idea, although I would, of course, 
> welcome more feedback on it, especially from Wilfried. If the TF is 
> happy with the principle of this idea, we can float it to the community 

i believe we said that we would look at the desired properties of
an "abuse contact" and then examine whether the IRT object is a close
enough approximation to start from there and make modifications
where necessary.  I would agree that the/an abuse contact object would
be closer to IRT than to person or role, but what exactly is missing
or carrying less than desired semantics is still to be found out.

Therefore I believe that a "simple rename" would be premature as would
circulating this idea to the wider community.  Please let's do the
requirements first to get a reality check on those rather than on
a proposed solution that we'd need to re-engineer for the problem.

We also need to address the alleged or real difference between incident
response and abuse and whether that can or should be preserved once
we're facing the public.

-Peter