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

On Sat, 27 Aug 2016 11:02:28 -0300
"Marilson" <marilson.mapa at gmail.com> wrote:
> Of course I do. In my explanatory statement I explained how stealing
> a pc is Internet Abuse. I wrote: 
> >> If someone had their home PC infected or abused, it's because
> >> someone...
> 
> If a computer was infected for sending spam or malicious files, it
> was stolen. After all we are talking about Internet, right? Are you
> talking about what? Home invasion? Theft of objects?
> 
Just read what you, yourself are typing above:

"If a computer was infected" - this means that: 

Someone or something did something

Someone or Something (or a program or whatever) DID infect

So, the definition of Internet Abuse, As I have stated it - Works
perfectly fine.

Maybe If you read the definition again, it can help you?

 "The non sanctioned use of a resource to infringe upon the usage
 rights of another resource"

This means: Someone (or something) USED you resource (Your PC) 
to send spam or do something or use it for...

See?

- If someone steals your PC or breaks into your home to steal your pc
 It is NOT Internet Abuse...

If they break in and USE  your PC to send spam - Then of course it is
Internet Abuse - and the definition holds up.

BUT

You are changing the point... You were siding with Gunther, and what
Gunther said was:

a Single resource can do Internet Abuse...

You are involving multiple resources and then claiming that it
addresses the first problem...

Not cool, so either you are arguing for the simple sake of arguing or
you do not understand the problem.

Which is it?

Andre