On Tue, 04 Oct 2016 21:42:59 +0530 Suresh Ramasubramanian <ops.lists@gmail.com> wrote:
Doing what you are doing. And pointing out that the AUP's you are referring to are written by, at the least, non ethical people and at the most, dishonest people. Ah, the legal departments of most every ISP and email provider then? In other words, colleagues of most everybody that attends a RIPE meeting, and official policy set by their employers? Interesting set of perceptions there – but not a terms of reference
On 04/10/16, 9:25 PM, "anti-abuse-wg on behalf of ox" <anti-abuse-wg-bounces@ripe.net on behalf of andre@ox.co.za> wrote: based on which I intend to carry on this discussion any further.
to refresh your memory, this is what was said:
Do yourself a favour. Go review the acceptable use policies of various large ISPs and email providers. Then come back with a better informed reply. It is pointless to continue this discussion, without your being better informed.
not sure how to respond to that, as it is fairly personally directed, but I will try... Just because various large ISPs and email providers says something it does not mean that it has to be accepted by society. Or even that anything and/or everything they say in common is correct, accurate or fair in an open,ethical and just society. a singular and simple example would be Google.com When their servers behave abusively they bounce emails to their clients saying that the sender has an error. ethical? - no. fair? - no no evil? - no. decent? - no. nice? - no. do I have to believe and trust the largest email provider on the planet earth, Google? - no.