[anti-abuse-wg] Definition of Abuse - preamble

On Thu, 25 Aug 2016 17:40:04 +0200
Gunther Nitzsche <gnitzsche at netcologne.de> wrote:
> On 08/25/2016 04:38 PM, ox wrote:
> > ...
> > I did not reply to this, as it will involve me being somewhat
> > direct but,
> > I have a serious problem with people when they disagree just to
> > argue or for no real reason.
> 
> Hmm.. I still do not see any arguments against my abuse
> definitions except: no, I want mine.
> 

What is your abuse definitions?

You proposed a change that would imply that Internet abuse can happen
when a resource abuses itself by itself and not involve another
resource?

Maybe if you could give an actual practical example of what you are
proposing and not just wind and air?

Sofar, you have wondered if sending a fax with wrong information is not
also abuse.

> You are getting somewhat emotional here - no good.
> 
Not at all. Realistic, practical.

Please provide a real world example of what you are proposing


> >
> > This means that they have a different intent - or agenda - or
> > something and it serves only to disrupt 
> My intent is to have a most broad definition of abuse as possible.
> You seem to intentionally want to restrict this definition. I just
> don't know why. But if other members of this list tend more
> to your definition, it will be fine for me.
> 

It is not about just that. I may also be wrong, I do not think that I
am, but I am willing to consider that I may be...

So, if you could please just provide a real world example of Internet
abuse where there is a single resource, that would be very helpful

Thank you

Andre