[anti-abuse-wg] Constructive Approach & Anonymity (Was RE: Verification of abuse contact addresses ? )

On Sun, 10 Mar 2019 18:33:47 -0700
"Ronald F. Guilmette" <rfg at tristatelogic.com> wrote:
> In message <EA68C6C9-B6F4-4B41-AF1E-FF63C174B164 at blacknight.com>, 
> Michele Neylon - Blacknight <michele at blacknight.com> wrote:
> >RIPE members and NCC staff should have the ability to face their
> >accuser, but if they're hiding behind a veil of anonymity that's
> >problematic. Personally I also find it very hard to engage in any
> >meaningful debate with "someone" if I have absolutely no idea who
> >they are, who they represent or what their agenda is.  
> 
> +1
> I concur 100%.

+1
but, in an open wg, any random unknown "accusers" are hardly credible.
The value of whatever is directly related to the proof of whatever and
we all have an agenda, we are all (hopefully) real people, not all of
us represent anyone. 

Yes, I do agree, it is "very hard", in real life (IRL), to engage any other human 
being in any forum anywhere. We never really know who anyone really
is or what their real agenda is (or are) and often we may perceive that
they represent x whereas and in truth, they secretly represent y.  

It would be extremely useful if we could, under penalty of death, make
all human beings wear little name badges containing the real truth of
whom they really are, what the ranking, order and importance of all
their agenda's are and then, we should make it completely illegal to
represent more than one entity at the same time...

(not signing the above drivel with my name as it was posted by my cat)