[ripe-list] possible abuse case with our emails / spam from euromoney/capacitymedia

On 23/02/2019 12:09, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via ripe-list wrote:
> ... I'm starting to wonder if it makes sense that the RIRs (IETF, ICANN, etc.), keeps publishing the list of attendees. There is any reason for that from the RIPE community or the RIPE NCC perspective? (please keep reading before responding)
> 
> I agree that this is very useful for the event participants itself, but it could be made available only for the participants, once they have checked-in (so they are on-site) and once they log-in only. This way we avoid people registering and actually not coming just to get the data.
> 
> This way also, if a participant is the one that is capturing the data, in addition to the consequences with the DPA, if identified, he/she can be banned for attending further RIR meetings. ...


Jordi,

I get more than 10 spams for each message I might want to actually read.
I survive with automation and by paying the absolute minimum of effort
on unwanted messages. I agree that SPAM is annoying. Therefore I
normally stop doing business with those that 'loose' my mail addresses.
Personally I am also a privacy advocate since the early 1970s, that's
before the Internet became a threat. ;-)

However we should not overreact to these practices and threats like you
are suggesting!

I fully agree that the RIRs should spend reasonable efforts to prosecute
abuse of the data we publish. However, publishing less as a reaction to
this abuse needs very very careful consideration.

Publishing the attendance lists is very useful for research and also for
projecting openness and transparency. For instance Shane Kerr has worked
on diversity from these published lists:
https://labs.ripe.net/Members/shane/measuring-diversity-at-ripe-meetings.
I personally am working on these lists right now in order to in support
developing the RIPE Chair selection procedure. We also publish mailing
list archives that are a treasure trove for research and a means of
storing our history and again being open and transparent.
Working from published data is key here, because others can re-produce
and check their research without needing any permission.

Personally I strongly believe that the negative sides of publishing this
data are negligible compared to the benefits. I just deal with the spam
and other consequences and enjoy the benefits.

Banning people from RIPE meetings is so far out that I hope you will
re-consider and withdraw that suggestion. Think it through a few steps
please: OHow can we maintain openness, transparency and low threshold to
participate once we do that? nce we start banning people where do we stop?

Best

Daniel