[anti-abuse-wg] the mandatory abuse field

lists at help.org wrote:
>
> They wild opinions are why this list is not a "consensus" of any sort.
> If someone has a certain opinion they are labeled as criminals,

Sure, they are in my country.

> spammers, etc. without any legitimate reason. This type of stuff comes
> from a religious belief and not anything that can be explained by logic.

Its not religion, its law in a lot of countries.

> I don't see why there is all this discussion of mandatory abuse fields
> when the RIR whois databases are filled with inaccuracies and false

How can you believe, that you can cleanup the database WITHOUT
a mandatory field ?
The mandory field means MORE accuracy, not less.

> whois data. When I point these out to ARIN I never hear back and it
> never gets fixed and I assume RIPE is the same way. Until you take care
> of that problem it is useless to require mandatory fields of any sort.

Where is your logic here ?
How can you have better data, without forcing the resource owner
to enter his information just in one field instead of spreading
it everywhere and have even no email address at all ?

Please tell us, how you think, how the database can be cleaned up
inf whatever way. Please supply a method instead of critizising
the mandatory field ...


Kind regards, Frank

>
>
>
>
>>
>> So, my personal summary is:
>> ---
>> Anybody, who is against a mandatory abuse field,
>> is a professional spammer, abuser, maintains
>> a bot net or sells open proxies or other services
>> used for abusing others.
>> They are criminals to my opinion.
>>
>> But thats only my impression ...
>> ---
>
>
>
>


-- 

Mit freundlichen Gruessen,
--
PHADE Software - PowerWeb                       http://www.powerweb.de
Inh. Dipl.-Inform. Frank Gadegast             mailto:frank at powerweb.de
Schinkelstrasse 17                                fon: +49 33200 52920
14558 Nuthetal OT Rehbruecke, Germany             fax: +49 33200 52921
======================================================================