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

Hi,

On 2 Feb 2011, at 2:57, Florian Weimer wrote:

[...]

> It was quite different to figure out, based on the transcript, what
> was going on.  It would have been nice to announce the intention of
> removing the WG chair beforehand, on the mailing list.

I am a bit surprised by this whole discussion because other than the politeness issue I am really not sure why who the chair of a WG is makes all the much difference. From my perspective, the chair has made a commitment to dedicate extra time and attention that other participants have not. But who the chair is should never have a significant impact on the WG's output and the output should be the consensus of the participants and not the decisions of some benevolent dictator.

If some people want particular individuals or companies to be blacklisted by the RIPE NCC then they need to make a formal proposal along those lines. I have not seen a proposal for a RIPE NCC operated blacklist of known blaggards who must not be allowed access to IP addresses but would be interested in reviewing a proposal if it is forthcoming.

Regards,

Leo Vegoda