[anti-abuse-wg] Draft Anti-Abuse WG Agenda - RIPE 66
- Previous message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] Draft Anti-Abuse WG Agenda - RIPE 66
- Next message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] Draft Anti-Abuse WG Agenda - RIPE 66
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Ronald F. Guilmette
rfg at tristatelogic.com
Thu Mar 7 07:51:08 CET 2013
In message <51372538.60604 at hovland.cx>, =?ISO-8859-1?Q?J=F8rgen_Hovland?= <jorgen at hovland.cx> wrote: > On 03/06/13 11:48, Brian Nisbet wrote: >> Ronald, >> Ronald F. Guilmette wrote the following on 05/03/2013 20:36: >>> I'd like to just reiterate my view that all other activities of this WG >>> will be utterly fruitless until such time as a reasonable, rational, and >>> generally accepted definition of "abuse" is in hand. >> >> I genuinely don't think it will be useful to spend time on this. I >> think an attempt to get a consensual definition of abuse would take >> the whole of the session in Dublin and every session thereafter and >> after all that time, I still don't think we would have got anywhere. >> If the rest of the WG disagrees with me, then we can raise it, but if >> n = the number of people in the WG, I fear we would have n + 1 >> definitions. > >I am pretty sure it will take until the end of the world to agree on a >definition. Perhaps even longer. "And when the broken hearted people, living in the world agree, there will be an answer, let it be." -- Paul McCartney
- Previous message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] Draft Anti-Abuse WG Agenda - RIPE 66
- Next message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] Draft Anti-Abuse WG Agenda - RIPE 66
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]