[anti-abuse-wg] Astroturfing?

It doesn't matter, mate. We are all astroturfers eh.

+1.

On 04/04/19, 10:36 AM, "anti-abuse-wg on behalf of ac" <anti-abuse-wg-bounces at ripe.net on behalf of ac at main.me> wrote:

    
    +1
    
    (and if the +1 is not clear: It means I agree and I have nothing to
    add. If I am pressed to add a comment, to explain my +1 I would venture
    to say that I agree with what was said because I know there are very
    few people actively tracking BGP jacking. I also know that some of
    those that do track it have spoken out so I agree completely that
    identifying experts and testimony of actual cases will not be one of
    the top issues faced by the registry. I hope that my +1 will therefore
    be accepted as a simple +1 as I have nothing more to add than simply
    repeating what has been said and stating my agreement thereof. If my +1
    is not acceptable or does not count as much, because I have not fully
    explained my agreement to what was said I would appreciate that being
    pointed out to myself)
    
    On Wed, 03 Apr 2019 19:57:35 +0530
    Suresh Ramasubramanian <ops.lists at gmail.com> wrote:
    
    > There are very few people who actively track BGP hijacks, the world
    > over - even among the larger community of network security folks.
    > 
    > More than one of those individuals is on this mailing list and has
    > spoken up during the discussion.
    > 
    > Identifying experts to detect and attest to cases of hijacking will
    > be the least of RIPE NCC's problems.
    > 
    > On 03/04/19, 7:50 PM, "anti-abuse-wg on behalf of Pavel Vraštiak"
    > <anti-abuse-wg-bounces at ripe.net on behalf of vrastiak at itself.cz>
    > wrote:
    > 
    >     I, for instance, subscribed to this list to express my support
    > for the proposal. After reviewing the comments I can say that the
    > only thing that we can (hopefully) agree on is that BGP hijacks are
    > generally bad and we would prefer technical solution instead of
    > policy. 
    >     I think that the idea of this proposal is good and I also think
    > that it could make some small difference (in a good way). The
    > questionable part is the process of choosing experts and impact on
    > the RIPE NCC budget. Looking forward to v2.0.
    >     
    >     -- 
    >     
    >     Pavel
    >     
    >     On 03. 04. 19 15:21, Sascha Luck [ml] wrote:
    >     > On Wed, Apr 03, 2019 at 12:52:45PM +0100, Carlos Friaas via
    >     > anti-abuse-wg wrote:  
    >     >> 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.  
    >     > 
    >     > Please provide evidence for your insinuation that anyone here
    >     > discriminates against Portuguese (or any other nationality for
    >     > that matter.) I can't but regard such an insinuation as a cheap
    >     > rhetorical trick.
    >     >   
    >     >> 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!  
    >     > 
    >     > I've long argued that all policy should only be discussed in
    >     > ap-wg as I don't think this limited an audience should make
    >     > policy with far-reaching consequences. Alas, everyone wants to
    >     > rule in Hell rather than serve in Heaven.
    >     >   
    >     >> If someone has any doubt about if newcomers are real persons,
    >     >> then please Google away. :-)  
    >     > 
    >     > Well, that gives me:
    >     > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sockpuppet_(Internet)#Meatpuppet
    >     > 
    >     > So the term "Astroturfing" is technically incorrect as that
    >     > implies fictitious entities with some commercial interest behind
    >     > it.
    >     > Nobody has said that and new participants are always welcome,
    >     > the more know about this the better.
    >     > However: If someone shows up here only to add a "+1" to a
    >     > proposal and is then never heard from again, I don't think their
    >     > support should carry much weight. I trust the chairs to consider
    >     > this, of course.
    >     > 
    >     > 
    >     > rgds,
    >     > SL  
    >     >>
    >     >>
    >     >>
    >     >>
    >     >> 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
    >     >>>
    >     >>>  
    >     > 
    >     >   
    >     
    >     
    > 
    > 
    >