[anti-abuse-wg] Decision on Proposal 2017-02

On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 05:08:29PM +0000, Brian Nisbet wrote:
>For instance, what about the suggested implementation is onerous or oppressive?

Nothing, and I didn't state that it was. The problem is that, once
accepted, the implementation is out of the hands of this
community or indeed everyone bar the NCC Board. They can make it
as onerous and oppressive as they want. 

Furthermore, from the general tenor of this discussion I can't
help assuming that 2017-02 won't be the end of it and I have to
take this into account when considering the (de)merits of
2017-02.

Also one point I raised remains so far entirely unaddressed - why
does a proposal and its implementation plan prescribe the use of
email (in 2018!) for contact information?

rgds,
Sascha Luck


>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: anti-abuse-wg <anti-abuse-wg-bounces at ripe.net> On Behalf Of
>> Sascha Luck [ml]
>> Sent: Thursday 15 March 2018 17:04
>> To: anti-abuse-wg at ripe.net
>> Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Decision on Proposal 2017-02
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 14, 2018 at 03:33:42PM +0100, Sander Steffann wrote:
>> >This proposal is a first step to catch low hanging fruit. Yes: there
>> >are many things that can (should) be improved, but getting consensus on
>> >these controversial topics is difficult. So the proposers are taking it
>> >one step at a time. Based on the discussion on this mailing list those
>> >steps apparently have to be very small, but at least there is the
>> >possibility of movement :)
>>
>> Correctly and perfectly summarised. A textbook example of early-stage frog-
>> boiling.
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boiling_frog
>>
>> The road to oppressive and onerous regulation is taken a small step at a time
>> in the 21st century and that's why it is important to resist such attempts NOW
>> while it is possible to do so without great personal sacrifice.
>>
>> For the avoidance of doubt, the above constitutes (continuing) opposition to
>> 2017-02.
>>
>> rgds,
>> Sascha Luck
>>
>