[anti-abuse-wg] Astroturfing?

As said in my previous email, if we take that strictly, then we will never have any IETF document or RIRs policy proposals reaching consensus. When I agree and will not provide any "extra" for that was has been already said (because the policy text or previous emails), I just do +1.

Or do you think people that agree, should then copy the rational for somebody that agrees in the policy proposals, or even the policy text, and say "this is what I agree"?

Regards,
Jordi
 
 

El 3/4/19 13:54, "anti-abuse-wg en nombre de Michele Neylon - Blacknight" <anti-abuse-wg-bounces at ripe.net en nombre de michele at blacknight.com> escribió:

    Carlos
    
    I've absolutely zero issue with new people engaging, but lots of one line "+1" or almost identical emails isn't meaningful engagement. 
    
    Regards
    
    Michele
    
    --
    Mr Michele Neylon
    Blacknight Solutions
    Hosting, Colocation & Domains
    https://www.blacknight.com/
    https://blacknight.blog/
    Intl. +353 (0) 59  9183072
    Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090
    Personal blog: https://michele.blog/
    Some thoughts: https://ceo.hosting/ 
    -------------------------------
    Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty
    Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,R93 X265,Ireland  Company No.: 370845
    
    On 03/04/2019, 12:53, "Carlos Friaças" <cfriacas at fccn.pt> wrote:
    
        
        Hi Michele, All,
        
        I had to Google for 'astroturfing'. I learned something today. :-)
        
        As i see it, the "community" is not a closed group.
        
        It was repeateadly stated that "consensus" or "rough consensus" is not a 
        vote. I think that is clear for everyone.
        
        Just like a few days ago i wrote that i hoped there wasn't any kind of 
        discrimination against portuguese participants, i hope there isn't also 
        any kind of discrimination against new participants on this WG.
        
        I may understand if some people prefer to have less people in the WG, but 
        i'm not part of that set.
        While worrying about how we can improve rules/tools against Abuse (that's 
        the point of an Anti-Abuse WG, right?), i would also like to see a much 
        larger number of people involved!
        
        If someone has any doubt about if newcomers are real persons, then 
        please Google away. :-)
        
        I met in person most of people that are supporting 2019-03 and also 
        those that are opposing it (some of which i even co-authored other 
        proposals), since a while back.
        
        ps: I think i haven't met Sebastien Lahtinen in person since 10y or so, so 
        if 2019-03 made him show up on the list, that's another plus :-))
        
        Best Regards,
        Carlos
        
        
        
        
        On Wed, 3 Apr 2019, Michele Neylon - Blacknight wrote:
        
        > All
        >
        > Is someone encouraging astroturfing?
        >
        > The number of either new or inactive members of this list who have posted one line messages in support of the recent policy discussion has reached insane levels
        >
        > Regards
        >
        > Michele
        >
        > --
        > Mr Michele Neylon
        > Blacknight Solutions
        > Hosting, Colocation & Domains
        > https://www.blacknight.com/
        > https://blacknight.blog/
        > Intl. +353 (0) 59  9183072
        > Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090
        > Personal blog: https://michele.blog/
        > Some thoughts: https://ceo.hosting/
        > -------------------------------
        > Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty
        > Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,R93 X265,Ireland  Company No.: 370845
        >
        >
    
    



**********************************************
IPv4 is over
Are you ready for the new Internet ?
http://www.theipv6company.com
The IPv6 Company

This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the exclusive use of the individual(s) named above and further non-explicilty authorized disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited and will be considered a criminal offense. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited, will be considered a criminal offense, so you must reply to the original sender to inform about this communication and delete it.