[anti-abuse-wg] 2019-04 New Policy Proposal (Validation of "abuse-mailbox")

Hi,

On Thu, May 16, 2019 at 09:55:14PM +0000, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote:
> Are they is the question
> 
> For example - ARIN just reclaimed a large number of IPs from an actor that created a large number of  shell companies.  http://m.slashdot.org/story/355802

And how exactly would this proposed policy change help with such a case?

Please do not just mix in any random example of successful anti-abuse
or anti-fraud action with "we need to spend more human lifetime on
complicated processes that the bad guys can just easily pass".

And, at least try the minimum amount of politeness in quoting according
to local customs.

(@chairs: can i propose a policy that makes it required policy to do 
proper e-mail quoting style, and otherwise people will permanently lose
their Internet access?  This would arguably only hit bad people and 
would be so much relief from this continuos abuse of my eyes!)

Gert Doering
        -- NetMaster
-- 
have you enabled IPv6 on something today...?

SpaceNet AG                      Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard, Michael Emmer
Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14        Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann
D-80807 Muenchen                 HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen)
Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444         USt-IdNr.: DE813185279
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: </ripe/mail/archives/anti-abuse-wg/attachments/20190517/7ee03264/attachment.sig>