ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Enough is enough: Intent to file an RFC 3683 against Jefsey Morfin

2005-08-29 11:44:28
Harald Tveit Alvestrand <harald(_at_)alvestrand(_dot_)no> wrote:

Jefsey Morfin has proved himself incapable of engaging in constructive 
dialogue with the IETF's participants, and has proved to be able to cause 
the consumption of huge amounts of the IETF's goodwill and energy.

   I don't wish to support Jefsey here: frankly I've given up reading his
posts.

The community approved RFC 3683. I believe it's time to use it.

   We should be clear on what we're talking about:
] 
] This memo recommends that the IESG also undertake a new type of action,
] termed a PR-action ("posting rights" action).
] 
] A PR-action identifies one or more individuals, citing messages
] posted by those individuals to an IETF mailing list, that appear to
] be abusive of the consensus-driven process.  If approved by the IESG,
] then:
] 
] o  those identified on the PR-action have their posting rights to
]    that IETF mailing list removed; and,
] 
] o  maintainers of any IETF mailing list may, at their discretion,
]    also remove posting rights to that IETF mailing list.
] 
] Once taken, this action remains in force until explicitly nullified
] and SHOULD remain in force for at least one year.
] 
] One year after the PR-action is approved, a new PR-action MAY be
] introduced which restores the posting rights for that individual.
] The IESG SHOULD consider the frequency of nullifying requests when
] evaluating a new PR-action.  If the posting rights are restored the
] individual is responsible for contacting the owners of the mailing
] lists to have them restored.

   Unfortunately, the criteria for a PR action are a bit vague:
] 
] Notably, in a small number of cases, a participant has engaged in
] what amounts to a "denial-of-service" attack to disrupt the
] consensus-driven process.  Typically, these attacks are made by
] repeatedly posting messages that are off-topic, inflammatory, or
] otherwise counter-productive.  In contrast, good faith disagreement
] is a healthy part of the consensus-driven process.

   To me, for example, 10,000 breakin attempts per day is merely a
minor nuisance, not beginning to approach "denial of service". To some
of my customers, one pornographic spam per month is enough to deny
them the enjoyment of email.

   Jefsey (last I checked) is frequently off-topic, occasionally
inflammatory, and usually counter-productive. Does this "amount to a
denial-of-service attack"?

   I could never feel comfortable calling it one. I'm sure there are
folks that consider my posts "frequently off-topic, occasionallly
inflammatory, and usually counter-productive".

   How many of us are confident that nobody ever perceives these faults
in us?

--
John Leslie <john(_at_)jlc(_dot_)net>

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>