In message <20160809153642.47730aa7@envy.e1.y.home>, Tore Anderson <tore@fud.no> wrote:
Question is, what exactly do you expect the members of the RIPE Anti-Abuse WG to actually do about these incidents you keep on reporting? We are not law enforcement, nor are we likely to go to someone's door bearing baseball bats and pitch forks.
I'd like to see RIPE NCC repossess any and all number resources that were allocated on the basis of fraud and/or deliberate deceit.
If on the other hand you want to give the RIPE NCC the mandate to de-register address space assigned to suspected abusers, you'll need to write a policy proposal to that effect. It won't happen by itself.
Not from "suspected abusers" generally. Not even from actual "abusers" generally. It would be utterly silly and pointless to try to get a resolution passed which would create any kind of sanction against "abusers"... let alone mere "suspected" ones... because this very working group has steadfastly refused all invitations and entreaties in the past to even try to do something as simple as defining the word "abuse". Thus, it would only be good for a big laugh all around to say we're gonna take back resources from those nasty lousey "abusers", because around here, nobody even seems to know... or even wants to know... what an "abuser" is, let alone who or what might actually be one. It's like like what some U.S. Supreme Court justice once famously said about pornography "I can't define it, but I know it when I see it." That seems to be the prevailing attitude about "abuse" around here. Obviously everybody who joined this mailing list has at least some vague feeling that such a thing as "abuse" actually "is real" and actually "does exist". It's just that nobody here wants to try to talk about it in any concrete terms... you know... using actual human language. (Based on past discussions, this seems to be due to a sense of fear. Nobody wants to say what they think "abuse" is, for fear that somewhere, someday, somehow, somebody is actually going to try to hold them, contractually, to that definition of "abuse" they agreed with, back 10 or 20 years ago. And you know, a lot of men do have this problem relating to "committment".) People on this list don't talk about "abuse". They talk around it. That's OK. I've gotten over my own personal dismay about this, and have moved on. Even *I* don't want to talk about "abuse" anymore. And at present, I am *not* talking about "abuse". I'm talking about fraud. Different subject entirely. And not just any old fraud. No, no no! I'm *only* talking about fraud perpetrated against RIPE and/or RIPE NCC! If all of you actual RIPE NCC members aren't even willing to entertain a serious and adult discussion about even _that_ very narrow and limited topic, then God help you all. In that case you might as well just publically declare the whole WHOIS data base a complete farce, hang up your keyboards, and go for beer. Regards, rfg