[anti-abuse-wg] Some Facts for the Record

On 1/27/2012 2:43 PM, russ at consumer.net wrote:
>> They don't work for you.
>
> Yes they do. They work for the community and I am part of the community

Alas, that does not mean you get to assign tasks to them, anymore than it means 
you get to tell the folks down at city hall what daily tasks to perform.

You might want to review the practical requirements for functioning 
administration in delegated democratic structures.  The core requirement is to 
get a substantial support of a significant constituency.  Just being a plaintive 
single voice isn't enough.


> pays the bills. The attitude you have is typical of ICANNers.

I haven't had anything to do with ICANN in more than 15 years and wasn't 
formally part of it then.  My involvement was pre-ICANN.  So you should consider 
something more current and substantive if you wish to continue the ad hominem 
bullying that you are invoking when someone disagrees with you.  There's plenty 
to criticize in my behavior, but please at least try to focus on failings that 
really do apply to me.


>> They can't anticipate every question someone might ask.
>
> These are basic questions that relate to the authority to operate which is
> one of the very. Everyone involved anticipates these questions will be
> asked.

Everyone?  Wow.  With such certitude, no doubt you can document that assertion?

In reality, what is obvious to one is obscure to another.  Again, if you think 
something should be in a FAQ, then do the work to provide it.  That's one of the 
aspects of community participation that seems to have escaped you.


> The problem is people like you.

The problem is people who have no active involvement in any of these 
administrative activities?  That is, after all, the proper description of my 
role with respect to RIPE and IANA.

(Full disclosure: there's an MOU between the IETF and ICANN, concerning a subset 
of IANA's functions, and I'm part of the IETF side that does the formal renewal. 
  But anyone who thinks that's a substantive task hasn't read the minutes of the 
IAOC...)


> For decades you have fostered an approach
> where only a small of group of people run everything and when people ask
> basic questions they get responses like you always provide.

I do apologize for requesting that folks get their facts straight and contribute 
their own effort to getting things done, rather than their imposing workload on 
others.

If a small group runs things -- and let's skip over the probable error of that 
assertion -- it's because the rest of the community chooses to be less active.

By the way, as for facts, you keep asserting that IANA is a separate legal 
entity and that the US Dept. Commerce has a contract with them.  Since it's 
already been pointed out that these assertions are incorrect -- and the language 
at IANA doesn't support your model:

    <http://www.iana.org/about>

perhaps you'd care to point at the legal documents that prove otherwise.


> That is why there is a need for someone
> like me to come on this list.

I could well be wrong, but I doubt that your strident efforts at bullying those 
who disagree with you is all that productive.

d/
-- 

   Dave Crocker
   Brandenburg InternetWorking
   bbiw.net