[arin-discuss] Dean -vs- ARIN... again (Re: The joy of SWIPping)

[Edward B. DREGER]

DA> Date: Thu, 15 May 2008 16:42:33 -0400 (EDT)
DA> From: Dean Anderson

[ N.B.: Detection of hyperbole is left as an exercise to the reader. ]

You started out okay...


DA> Its odd that Board members wouldn't see that problem, but they seem
DA> to have no regard the rules and laws.

...but there's where things begin breaking down.  Unsubstantiated ad
hominem attack.  Unless, of course, you have some relevant legal
proceedings that you or ARIN would like to share.  (I believe that both
parties' counsel recently chatted, yes?)


DA> CEO Plzak, with apparent consent of the Board, has asserted in
DA> written correspondence that my email to this list may be considered
DA> "spam", and blocked as "spam".

As could my mail.  Or anyone else's.  This list has a specific charter;
messages failing to meet that charter may be disallowed.

I posit that I might be disciplined if I posted my favorite pancake
recipe, its glucose release profile, a history of pancakes, and my
theories on carbohydrate metabolism -- all the while insisting that I
had a right to post my diatribes because ARIN could run more efficiently
(with healthier staff) by fixing and serving my excellent pancakes.

If a message doesn't meet certain criteria, it gets shot down.  Your
insinuation that ARIN would maliciously obstruct legitimate abuse claims
is fallacious, insidious, disingenuous, and generally just not nice.
(Indeed, I can see how ARIN board members might suffer irreperable
damage if your carefully-worded claims have the effect of leading
reasonable people to believe derogatory-yet-unproven statements.)

Of course, you are correct that reputation _does_ come in to play:  If I
receive an abuse claim from someone who has an established track record
of frequently posting about how anyone who has ever met Paul Vixie is a
criminal mastermind bent on controlling the Internet... yeah, you're
right that I'd be considering the source.

There's a difference between heated good-faith discussion of complex
issues, and someone repeatedly trying to sniff out some statutory
language to push one's own vendettas.  People who discuss with intent to
resolve actual issues tend to be treated as such.  Likewise, people who
are eager to make damning accusations and legal threats also tend to be
treated accordingly.

Many of us know your opinions of ARIN, DNSBLs, the IETF, NANOG, Vixie,
yadda yadda.  Anyone interested in more can read your IADL.ORG blog.

Many of us have been humoring you, albeit often somewhat unwittingly,
for a decade now.  Why not go to court, get your judgements, save the
Internet, and then come back to gloat about it?  Surely that would be
easier than enduring the endless discrimination, strife, and suffering
that you cite _ad nauseum_.


Eddy
--
Everquick Internet - http://www.everquick.net/
A division of Brotsman & Dreger, Inc. - http://www.brotsman.com/
Bandwidth, consulting, e-commerce, hosting, and network building
Phone: +1 785 865 5885 Lawrence and [inter]national
Phone: +1 316 794 8922 Wichita
________________________________________________________________________
DO NOT send mail to the following addresses:
davidc at brics.com -*- jfconmaapaq at intc.net -*- sam at everquick.net
Sending mail to spambait addresses is a great way to get blocked.
Ditto for broken OOO autoresponders and foolish AV software backscatter.