[anti-abuse-wg] Status of 2011-06

 >Without expressing on my behalf any opinion on what you're saying above,
 >if you are going to make accusations regarding NCC behaviour on the 
mailing

Why don't you just them to respond to the list and address the issues?  
They just point me
to the AUP and won't address that the requests are not coming from me.  
They say to use -r
in my requests but won't address the the fact the requests would not 
give abuse contacts or
that requests would then have be different to RIPE than the other 
RIR's.  They won't address
the issue that the abuse contacts involve all regions and not just 
RIPE.  They won't name the
legal advisor or point to any written opinion.  There is no way to tell 
anything that happened
or why they did it.  Here is the information that is available to the 
"community"

http://meetings.ripe.net/ripe-57/presentations/De_Ruig-Update_from_Data_Protection_Task_Force.nctn.pdf

http://www.ripe.net/ripe/groups/tf/dp/report-of-the-ripe-data-protection-task-force

If they had a legitimate process a report would contain references, 
discussions of the issues being raised,
the identity of the legal adviser, etc.  The presentation is so full of 
acronyms that most people would have no
idea what is discussed.  The report is so vague that you really can't 
determine, for the most part, what was done
or why.  Common sense issues like whether the contacts agreed to have 
their information posted in a public
database is not even mentioned.

These decisions affect millions of people around the word and not just a 
few insiders on this list or in these groups
that have all these meetings that most people cannot attend (even if 
they did attend they would be driven
out by the insiders in short order).  You show me where the general 
Internet community can make heads or tails
of any of this.

A few comments I got from visitors to my web site this week:

"On the link for RIPE .. and I still wonder what drives them to block 
you guys ..."

"Does the EU even begin to comprehend the effect of this as related to 
e-crime?"

"Seems the EU is good for some things, maybe .. but is going a bit 
overboard on this one.  Keep us posted. "

It seems this community consensus thing isn't getting across to the 
users being affected.


> I'm sure we'd all also love to see anything official from the Dutch 
> Data Protection Authority.

We'll see.  So far not even an acknowledgement.

Thank You