Hi, On Mon, Jan 20, 2020 at 05:10:46PM +0200, Tõnu Tammer via anti-abuse-wg wrote:
However, as the chair kindly pointed, RIPE policy development follows certain rules: https://www.ripe.net/publications/docs/ripe-710 which in first part of the document clearly states: "Conclusions are reached by consensus." According to Oxford Dictionary, consensus means an opinion that all members of a group agree with.
Actually we operate on "rough consensus", so the result does not have to be unanimous agremeent. What it needs to have is - "some vague feeling of 'sufficient'" people support a proposal - opposing arguments are "sufficiently" addressed This can be, indeed, very hard to judge depending on the nature of the proposal and the opposing arguments. But, in other words, if you have a single person jumping up and down and stamping their feet "I DO NOT WANT THIS!! NEVAR!" this is *not* sufficient to block a proposal - unless said person has strong actual arguments that are not sufficiently addressed by the proposers.
I standby my previous comment: the community (of RIPE) has grown encompassing legitimate business but also abusers who have become part of that community.
Since I am opposing the proposal on the table, this statement seems to make me an "abuser". Right? Gert Doering -- NetMaster -- have you enabled IPv6 on something today...? SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard, Michael Emmer Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen) Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279