[anti-abuse-wg] AS24940 Hetzner -- non-role contact wanted

In message <DB7PR06MB56435FBFAB55AD9FC7611829943D0 at DB7PR06MB5643.eurprd06.prod.
outlook.com>, Brian Nisbet <brian.nisbet at heanet.ie> wrote:

>This conversation is not in any way useful to the community at this point
>and it is definitely not in the spirit of the Code of Conduct.

Point of order Mr. Chairman!

I am now, quite reluctantly, obliged to ask if you also are in agreement
with the specific passages of the RIPE Code of Conduct that I posted here
yesterday, in particular the part about "misleading participants" and/or
"impersonating others".

I am further obliged to ask you if you would agree that your role as Chairman
gives you not only the right but also the responsibility to insure that
these offenses against the Working Group are not allowed to go on, ad
infinitum, unchallenged and with no active response from the Chair.

I am reminded of a story which I have now heard, repeatedly and from multiple
reliable sources, of the time when the notorious bulk emailer Scott Richter
somehow managed to finagle his way into one particular MAAWG meeting,
whereupon he allegedly (mostly) hung out at the bar and attempted to strike
up conversations with several of the MAAWG participants, all in a covert
effort to advance his own personal/commercial pro-abuse agenda.

As the story goes, eventually someone in the know recognized him, understood
implicitly that he was there not in support of the goals of MAAWG, but for
some other counter-purpose entirely, after which, as I understand it, he was
appropriately ejected and instructed not to come back.

Mr. Chairman, I am obliged to ask if you agree that that it is not only
within your authority, but also within your responsibility to likewise
eject from the AAWG mailing list anyone who can likewise be shown to have
been "misleading participants", "impersonating others", or basically playing
for the other (anti-anti-abuse) team., all in clear violation of the RIPE
Code of Conduct.  Or is it your intent to turn a blind eye to such matters,
and to simply stand by and allow this WG to degenerate, via the slow and
subtle infiltration of quasi-anonymous bulk mail industry sock puppets,
into the anti-anti-abuse working group?

To be clear, I *do* raise this question as a point of order, and I believe
that the question must rightly take precedence over all other discussions.

The reason is simple.   I *do* believe that there exists clear and compelling
evidence that at least one of the participants here is and has been here,
-covertly- and with intentional deception, representing the commercial
interests of the bulk emailing industry.  I futher believe that there
exists clear evidence that the person in question is not only playing for
the other team, but also that she has been consistantly and routinely 
disruptive here, posting pointless tirades and allegations about alleged
"abuses" by various multinational corporations, none of which, even if true,
either does have or would have any bearing whatsoever on the work of this
Working Group, and none of which, even if true, would ever be anything that
the Working Group could even possibly do anything about.

In short, it is my contention that this Working Group and this mailing list
have been covertly infiltrated, via multiple ruses employing multiple clear
and deliberate deceptions, in violation of the RIPE CoC, and that this was
all done with the clear and apparent motivation to thwart, derail, and
obstruct any and all meaningful debate here, especially as it may relate to
matters that -are- actually relevant to the WG's work.

Mr. Chairman, I ask you to summarily eject the member in question from the
mailing list with clear instructions not to return and not to try to do so
via the ruse of yet additional sock puppet fradulent identities.  I ask you
to do so in accordance with your clear authority and responsibility under
the RIPE Code of Conduct, which is, I think, not at all ambiguous on this
point.  You cannot, I think, merely stand by and allow arbitrary actors with
hidden agendas and fradulent identities to infiltrate and repeatedly disrupt
and thwart this Working Group, or this mailing list, whether via repeated
off-topic rantings or via other artificial means.  To do so would be a 
serious abrogation of your responsibilities as Chair of this WG, and one
which I and others might reasonably feel duty bound to bring to the
attention of other and higher RIPE authorities.

I await the Chair's response and the Chair's appropriate action.


Regards,
rfg