Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Definition of Abuse - preamble
On 08/25/2016 04:38 PM, ox wrote:
... I did not reply to this, as it will involve me being somewhat direct but,
I have a serious problem with people when they disagree just to argue or for no real reason.
Hmm.. I still do not see any arguments against my abuse definitions except: no, I want mine. You are getting somewhat emotional here - no good.
This means that they have a different intent - or agenda - or something and it serves only to disrupt
My intent is to have a most broad definition of abuse as possible. You seem to intentionally want to restrict this definition. I just don't know why. But if other members of this list tend more to your definition, it will be fine for me.
I even doubt that the anti-abuse-working-group is limited to network based abuse. Entering wrong registration data (let's say by FAX) could also be covered by this group though it is not a network based abuse.
This is not an abuse group for battered men or battered women or abused animals.
What are you talking about? Yes, this group is not about animals, I agree .. but what the heck..?
It is a network abuse group.
No, it is not an abuse group for people whose pc's has been stolen or abused in their homes.
No, it is not an abuse group for old fax machines or faxing of fake documents to anyone or even for that matter faxing of documents to commit fraud.
Says who? You are, as I do, a member of this mailing list and therefore a standard member of the anti-abuse-working-group. As far as I know you are no chair nor co-chair of this group and you are not in the position to define what to discuss in this group or not. (neither am I) I don't care if abuse is commited by old or new fax machines; if it somehow involves our/any abuse-department I do care. And if I (or i.e. legal authorities) cannot identify a fraudster because of a fake registration (DNS, IP-Allocation, whatsoever..) than I do see a direct relation to this group, regardless of the used technique. So yes, it *might* be the case that a fax triggers an abuse case. I don't want to talk about fax machines all the time - I just want a definition of abuse and of the goals of this group which *allows* me and others to discuss abuse incidents regardless of the terms "internet abuse" or "a second resource". I don't think, that this wish is that abstruse..
It is the RIPE Anti Abuse WG --- We discuss network abuse.... Well, I do not see very much discussing here - just a very "blocking" attitude.
tl;dr: I prefer a very broad definition of abuse not restricted to "internet abuse" best greetings, Gunther NetCologne Systemadministration -- NetCologne Gesellschaft für Telekommunikation mbH Am Coloneum 9 ; 50829 Köln Geschäftsführer: Timo von Lepel, Mario Wilhelm Vorsitzender des Aufsichtsrates: Dr. Andreas Cerbe HRB 25580, AG Köln
On Thu, 25 Aug 2016 17:40:04 +0200 Gunther Nitzsche <gnitzsche@netcologne.de> wrote:
On 08/25/2016 04:38 PM, ox wrote:
... I did not reply to this, as it will involve me being somewhat direct but, I have a serious problem with people when they disagree just to argue or for no real reason.
Hmm.. I still do not see any arguments against my abuse definitions except: no, I want mine.
What is your abuse definitions? You proposed a change that would imply that Internet abuse can happen when a resource abuses itself by itself and not involve another resource? Maybe if you could give an actual practical example of what you are proposing and not just wind and air? Sofar, you have wondered if sending a fax with wrong information is not also abuse.
You are getting somewhat emotional here - no good.
Not at all. Realistic, practical. Please provide a real world example of what you are proposing
This means that they have a different intent - or agenda - or something and it serves only to disrupt
My intent is to have a most broad definition of abuse as possible. You seem to intentionally want to restrict this definition. I just don't know why. But if other members of this list tend more to your definition, it will be fine for me.
It is not about just that. I may also be wrong, I do not think that I am, but I am willing to consider that I may be... So, if you could please just provide a real world example of Internet abuse where there is a single resource, that would be very helpful Thank you Andre
participants (2)
-
Gunther Nitzsche -
ox