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

On Sat, 17 Mar 2018 08:43:45 +0100
Gert Doering <gert at space.net> wrote:
> Reading comments like *this* as an argument *for* the proposal makes
> me wonder if I should reconsider being neutral about it.
> What Malcolm said is something that carefully needs to be considered:
> what is the real goal to be achieved, and does this proposal help in
> any way to get there?  If *not*, extra measures that use up resources
> and could have unforeseen consequences, should not be implemented.
> What Sasha said is also something that carefully needs to be
> considered, and not just waved away as "he's just being
> irresponsible".
> To ask you: in which ways will this proposal help the internet make
> less of a "shit hole"?  Those that care already have working abuse 
> contacts, those that care not will find ways to fulfill the letter of
> the policy, and still care not.

I am not the American president and I actually object to the common use
of the words "Shit Hole" as much as I object to women being grabbed by
the pussy by powerful men, I guess.

maybe I am just too conservative, maybe I am an assh*le myself, I do
not know. 

Either way, I do choose to take offense.

To answer the question though: This proposal does make the world a
better place.

If a resource holder wishes to be allocated scarce public resources
such a resource holder should also be responsible about the operations
of such scarce public resources.

Andre