[anti-abuse-wg] WhoisSecurity.com

On 03/06/2012 22:54, lists at help.org wrote:
>  >I and the NCC will be reporting back to this list and possibly the NCC
> Services list. We won't be updating any forms on your website and that
> would be not only impractical but also not work I'm willing to
> undertake. My and >Tobias' responsibility is to this group, not a random
> website.
>
>
> You and others on here always suggest that if a problem is detected then
> the community should do something to fix it. Now you want to change your
> story once that gets done and you don't agree with it. The reason for
> the web site is because the information being posted here in incomplete
> and, in some cases, intentionally deceptive. Several people have
> recently posted external web site and they have not been met with all
> the complaints I see here. Mr. Veseley is the only person to submit any
> kind of legitimate response. I have been going through the weirds and I
> see some interesting stuff. I will be going through all the RIR's and
> adding links to their whois processes. I also see there is a survey and
> comment period for revamping the whois system
> (http://www.icann.org/en/news/public-comment/draft-whois-requirements-survey-30may12-en.htm).
> once I prepare my comments for that i will be updating WhoisSecurity.com
> with the weirds stuff.

I find it truly baffling that you can take my words and twist them in 
the way you've managed. What the community has said has been taken on 
board, we've asked the NCC to put in the work to fully explain the 
reasons behind the current data protection procedures. This update, when 
complete, will be posted on ripe.net and reported here. I have made no 
comments against your website, good luck with it, what I've said is that 
we (or likely the NCC) will be reporting back to this list, not filling 
in a webform. I'm sorry if this angers you in some way I can't fathom. 
This is the last time I'll state this in this thread.

> Finally, Mr. Nisbet, you should not use the word "responsibility" when
> you refer to yourself as you are completely irresponsible.

Brian is fine. If you have to go for ad hominem attacks, please don't 
dress them in false formality. However, for preference, as stated many 
times, please don't indulge in them on this mailing list.

And I say this in full knowledge of the fact that you'll likely just 
claim I'm still trying to silence you.

Brian,
Co-chair, RIPE AA-WG.