[anti-abuse-wg] Definition of Abuse

In message <20160817012222.GB93886 at cilantro.c4inet.net>, 
"Sascha Luck [ml]" <aawg at c4inet.net> wrote:

>Perhaps you subscribe to Mr Goebbels' axiom that, if you repeat a
>lie often enough, it becomes the truth?

Can I get an official ruling on this?

Does the above qualify as a "Godwin"?  (And do I get a coupon for that? :-)

>You fail at secondary-school law too. They (whoever they may be)
>have to prove *nothing*. It is up to you to prove your
>accusations or shut the fuck up. 

You seem, um, emotional.

For the life of me, I have trouble understanding why.

Isn't it kind-of a fundamental tenet of your overall belief system
that "If it isn't you network, then it isn't any of your business"?
 
Well, OrangeWebSite and its multitude of blocks isn't your network.
So what do you care what I say about it?

If have defamed them, then what business is that of your's?  If I have
defamed them, they THEY are the injured party, not you.  So why not
let THEM come forward, show their faces, and sue in me open court?

They can do that, if they want.  I'm here.  I'm not hiding.  They
can easily serve me with papers anytime they want.  My address is
in my WHOIS record for all to see... unlike this mysterious and
shady OrangeWebSite thing, which apparently felt the need to hide
behind BOTH a WHOIS cloaking service AND a fake mailing address.

So, Sasha, what is YOUR interest in any of this?  It seems to me that
going by your own rules, this is none of your business and thus, none
of your concern.

Agreed?


Regards,
rfg