[anti-abuse-wg] Draft Anti-Abuse WG Minutes - RIPE 61

I personally have no position on this Richard Cox matter, because I have
not been privvy to any of the interactions that led up to the current/
recent bruhaha, and also because my position, even if I had one, would be
largely irrelevant to anything, because I neither own nor control any
assets which fall within RIPE's jurisdiction (and thus I have no standing
to have a position anyway).

But I did feel compelled to make one brief comment about something my friend
Suresh just said...

In message <AANLkTimaLn=Uboczx-ZpbR7fJg4V=aHibxQvoH3eXFC8 at mail.gmail.com>, 
Suresh Ramasubramanian <ops.lists at gmail.com> wrote:

>Second - the mantra, meme, fallacy etc of the "we are not the XYZ
>police" that I keep hearing cited.  It would be fun indeed if a bank
>manager sanctioned a loan for say a quarter of a million dollars (lets
>say comparable to an allocation for a /15) and then baldly state that
>he's not the document police ..

Suresh did not include any emoticon which would help to clarify what he
actually intended here (ironic humor perhaps?), but I just wanted to
clarify, in case anybody hasn't been paying attention for the past
two years, that Suresh's analogy about irresponsible bank managers
making quarter-million-dollar loans (AND paying little attention to
the niceties of the corresponding real estate title documentation) has
indeed been rife of late.

http://www.helium.com/items/1989991-what-is-robo-signing-foreclosure-mortgage

Anyway, (and perhaps this was the point that Suresh was attempting to make)
I am persuaded that missing and/or incomplete documentation of the title
to _Internet_ (IP) real estate is no more likely to produce acceptable
results than those produced by a zillion missing (meatspace) real estate
title documents.


Regards,
rfg