On Wed, Apr 03, 2019 at 02:47:27PM +0100, Carlos Friaas wrote:
Too easy (you might have missed this one...):
Dear group members from Portugal stated your support for 2019-03, Can you please provide some more arguments than your humble "+1" statement? This is a working group, not a voting.
While it may have been better to address all the "+1" crowd, I'm not sure this constitutes *discrimination*.
The message was directed to a "group members from Portugal". Members from IE, IL, US, CZ and so on that made brief statements of support were left out of this request. I can't understand why.
That may have just been because those have been seen here before. That said, I agree with the general statement. Rather than "+1" every supporter should provide *some* evidence that they've at least *read* the proposal. For the avoidance of doubt, this means *every* supporter, regardless of nationality or length of subscription.
(...)
I've long argued that all policy should only be discussed in ap-wg as I don't think this limited an audience should make policy with far-reaching consequences. Alas, everyone wants to rule in Hell rather than serve in Heaven.
What you argue is _not_ "current rules" or the PDP.
It used to be until the charter was changed. I didn't agree with that then, I don't agree with it now. For exactly the reasons that are now becoming evident.
Well, that gives me: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sockpuppet_(Internet)#Meatpuppet
So the term "Astroturfing" is technically incorrect as that implies fictitious entities with some commercial interest behind it.
So you're now going further than attacking one nationality, aiming at all those who expressed support for 2019-03? (i.e. disagreeing with your view).
Not all. Only those who suddenly turn up, "+1" and then disappear again, as they undoubtedly will (or perhaps until *your* next proposal comes up?)
I'm not going reply with a different Wikipedia URL, but i suspect you know which one i'm thinking about :-))
No, I don't have a clue. Enlighten me?
Nobody has said that and new participants are always welcome, the more know about this the better.
It's not only about "knowing" it's also being able to support or oppose any proposal (present or future). For me the keyword is "participation".
That was implied. My contention is (and I've been expressing that many times before) that this wg is not representative of the RIPE community but to only a small element of it namely "anti-abuse warriors". Thus I would very much welcome increased participation in this wg because whatever gets cooked up here affects ALL OF US. What I do not welcome is "support" that takes the form of subscribing here, plonking down "+1" and then vanishing into obscurity again. Which is (at least the Wikipedia) definition of a meat-puppet.
You might be rushing to judgements. You might draw that conclusion if there is more to discuss on the table 6 months or 1 year from now, and people stay silent or if they left the mailing list -- which is something noone can evaluate on such a short notice.
Easy. judge the worth of support at least in part on previous contributions, and I fervently hope this is what the chairs are doing. If not, I would like the opportunity to rise a hundred opponents to each provide a "-1"... rgds, SL
On Wed, 3 Apr 2019, Michele Neylon - Blacknight wrote:
All
Is someone encouraging astroturfing?
The number of either new or inactive members of this list who have posted one line messages in support of the recent policy discussion has reached insane levels
Regards
Michele???
-- Mr Michele Neylon Blacknight Solutions Hosting, Colocation & Domains https://www.blacknight.com/ https://blacknight.blog/ Intl. +353 (0) 59 9183072 Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090 Personal blog: https://michele.blog/ Some thoughts: https://ceo.hosting/ ------------------------------- Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,R93 X265,Ireland Company No.: 370845