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

On Thu, 15 Mar 2018 18:44:44 +0000
"Sascha Luck [ml]" <aawg at c4inet.net> wrote:
> 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. 
> 
within the implementation. (wherein there is nothing onerous or
oppressive - as all seem to agree...) 

> 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.
>
to object because you may object in the future to something
unspecified or unknown is the same as just objecting for the sake of
objecting.
 
> 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?
> 
because everyone has email.

not everyone has telegram, whatsup, insertnameofyourcommshere or simply
'trusts' all java(script)/apps from wherever...

Regards

Andre