This archive is retained to ensure existing URLs remain functional. It will not contain any emails sent to this mailing list after July 1, 2024. For all messages, including those sent before and after this date, please visit the new location of the archive at https://mailman.ripe.net/archives/list/anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net/
[anti-abuse-wg] working in new version of 2019-04 (Validation of "abuse-mailbox")
- Previous message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] working in new version of 2019-04 (Validation of "abuse-mailbox")
- Next message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] working in new version of 2019-04 (Validation of "abuse-mailbox")
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Ronald F. Guilmette
rfg at tristatelogic.com
Thu Jan 16 11:44:08 CET 2020
In message <4be52277-cecb-603f-6840-4ee76245b0dd at first.org>, Serge Droz <serge.droz at first.org> wrote: >I think we already spent way more executive time on this thread than it >would cost us to verify e-mail addresses. I think that I may cut that out, print it in a 48-point type face, have it framed, and hang it on my office wall. :-) This is true even though I expressed some similar view on some similar situation here already some years ago. >And honestly: taking a step back and reading this entire thread, I'm not >surprised that the bad guys are winning. You know: They don't care about >the purty and beauty of a solution. They just do it and profit, and >probably have a fabulous time seeing us argue and go at each others >throats. I myself have certainly expressed this view previously, in private if not also in public. Regards, rfg
- Previous message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] working in new version of 2019-04 (Validation of "abuse-mailbox")
- Next message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] working in new version of 2019-04 (Validation of "abuse-mailbox")
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]