From ibeanusielvis at gmail.com  Sat Jan  1 06:25:08 2022
From: ibeanusielvis at gmail.com (Ibeanusi Elvis)
Date: Sat, 1 Jan 2022 15:25:08 +0900
Subject: [Community-Discuss] [apnic-talk]Re: [arin-ppml] Update on
 Litigation Between AFRINIC and Cloud Innovation ltd
In-Reply-To: <dd53ebc8-c8ef-8008-c31f-b2d90c58bc38@geier.ne.tz>
References: <CANanHiw4sexT3NaogQahUedT4qg8x8N_i=bLYrVW01C2MKMSsw@mail.gmail.com>
 <35139.1640924101@segfault.tristatelogic.com>
 <CAMod5rpZ_POsju0n=WMXLbXqwSJqe-MBH=DEo_-ZrVmC8oz-kw@mail.gmail.com>
 <dd53ebc8-c8ef-8008-c31f-b2d90c58bc38@geier.ne.tz>
Message-ID: <08910347-184C-4995-B743-78ED69C4FE72@gmail.com>

Indeed Ronald?s statements were offensive and defamatory. Which violates the AFRINIC Code of Conduct in section B; 2, 3 and 4. 
To be exact, his statement against me referring to me as IGNORANT

      "Sockpuppetry is not an "ideology".  It is a well-established fact of life
      on the modern Internet, just as "astroturfing" is in real life.  If you
      don't know that then it is because either you are ignorant or else it is
      because you are pretending to be ignorant? 

Additionally, defamatory as he infers that the people in the community are not ?REAL PEOPLE?. 
The community is of course open-minded to criticism, we are not always going to agree with each other but we can be and have opposite perspectives but I believe there are better ways to disagree than being offensive, defamatory, and violating the Code of Conduct. 

Best regards,
Elvis. 

> On Dec 31, 2021, at 23:36, Frank Habicht <geier at geier.ne.tz> wrote:
> 
> On 31/12/2021 16:45, Cheken Chetty wrote:
>> Good day all, chairs,
>> I would like to call out a violation of the Code of Conduct by Ronald. His statements are clearly against section B, numbers 2, 3 and 4 within the AFRINIC code of conduct. His actions and statements are defamatory and quite offensive.
>> Regards
> 
> Hi Cheken Chetty,
> 
> Please assist to state any affiliation of concern you have and assist to clarify :
> - who is defamed
> - who is offended
> 
> Thanks,
> Frank
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss




From barry.macharia at me.com  Sat Jan  1 09:36:23 2022
From: barry.macharia at me.com (Barry Macharia)
Date: Sat, 1 Jan 2022 12:36:23 +0300
Subject: [Community-Discuss] [apnic-talk]Re: [arin-ppml] Update on
	Litigation Between AFRINIC and Cloud Innovation ltd
In-Reply-To: <08910347-184C-4995-B743-78ED69C4FE72@gmail.com>
References: <08910347-184C-4995-B743-78ED69C4FE72@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <B6EE0DF9-3580-4322-8156-5FDD553AFD9E@me.com>

Elvis , 

Offensive to who ????? 


Barry 
> On 1 Jan 2022, at 09:27, Ibeanusi Elvis <ibeanusielvis at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> ?Indeed Ronald?s statements were offensive and defamatory. Which violates the AFRINIC Code of Conduct in section B; 2, 3 and 4. 
> To be exact, his statement against me referring to me as IGNORANT
> 
>      "Sockpuppetry is not an "ideology".  It is a well-established fact of life
>      on the modern Internet, just as "astroturfing" is in real life.  If you
>      don't know that then it is because either you are ignorant or else it is
>      because you are pretending to be ignorant? 
> 
> Additionally, defamatory as he infers that the people in the community are not ?REAL PEOPLE?. 
> The community is of course open-minded to criticism, we are not always going to agree with each other but we can be and have opposite perspectives but I believe there are better ways to disagree than being offensive, defamatory, and violating the Code of Conduct. 
> 
> Best regards,
> Elvis. 
> 
>> On Dec 31, 2021, at 23:36, Frank Habicht <geier at geier.ne.tz> wrote:
>> 
>>> On 31/12/2021 16:45, Cheken Chetty wrote:
>>> Good day all, chairs,
>>> I would like to call out a violation of the Code of Conduct by Ronald. His statements are clearly against section B, numbers 2, 3 and 4 within the AFRINIC code of conduct. His actions and statements are defamatory and quite offensive.
>>> Regards
>> 
>> Hi Cheken Chetty,
>> 
>> Please assist to state any affiliation of concern you have and assist to clarify :
>> - who is defamed
>> - who is offended
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> Frank
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Community-Discuss mailing list
>> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
>> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss



From ibeanusielvis at gmail.com  Sat Jan  1 11:45:03 2022
From: ibeanusielvis at gmail.com (Ibeanusi Elvis)
Date: Sat, 1 Jan 2022 20:45:03 +0900
Subject: [Community-Discuss] [apnic-talk]Re: [arin-ppml] Update on
 Litigation Between AFRINIC and Cloud Innovation ltd
In-Reply-To: <B6EE0DF9-3580-4322-8156-5FDD553AFD9E@me.com>
References: <08910347-184C-4995-B743-78ED69C4FE72@gmail.com>
 <B6EE0DF9-3580-4322-8156-5FDD553AFD9E@me.com>
Message-ID: <CANanHixhRrs=UVzTFwS0HfWosMLuxpiUTr8CqimhH68wetJGZw@mail.gmail.com>

Barry,

As I earlier stated, offensive to me.

Regards,
Elvis.

On Sat, Jan 1, 2022 at 18:36 Barry Macharia <barry.macharia at me.com> wrote:

> Elvis ,
>
> Offensive to who ?????
>
>
> Barry
> > On 1 Jan 2022, at 09:27, Ibeanusi Elvis <ibeanusielvis at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > ?Indeed Ronald?s statements were offensive and defamatory. Which
> violates the AFRINIC Code of Conduct in section B; 2, 3 and 4.
> > To be exact, his statement against me referring to me as IGNORANT
> >
> >      "Sockpuppetry is not an "ideology".  It is a well-established fact
> of life
> >      on the modern Internet, just as "astroturfing" is in real life.  If
> you
> >      don't know that then it is because either you are ignorant or else
> it is
> >      because you are pretending to be ignorant?
> >
> > Additionally, defamatory as he infers that the people in the community
> are not ?REAL PEOPLE?.
> > The community is of course open-minded to criticism, we are not always
> going to agree with each other but we can be and have opposite perspectives
> but I believe there are better ways to disagree than being offensive,
> defamatory, and violating the Code of Conduct.
> >
> > Best regards,
> > Elvis.
> >
> >> On Dec 31, 2021, at 23:36, Frank Habicht <geier at geier.ne.tz> wrote:
> >>
> >>> On 31/12/2021 16:45, Cheken Chetty wrote:
> >>> Good day all, chairs,
> >>> I would like to call out a violation of the Code of Conduct by Ronald.
> His statements are clearly against section B, numbers 2, 3 and 4 within the
> AFRINIC code of conduct. His actions and statements are defamatory and
> quite offensive.
> >>> Regards
> >>
> >> Hi Cheken Chetty,
> >>
> >> Please assist to state any affiliation of concern you have and assist
> to clarify :
> >> - who is defamed
> >> - who is offended
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Frank
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Community-Discuss mailing list
> >> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
> >> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Community-Discuss mailing list
> > Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
> > https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20220101/1ad86915/attachment.html>

From noah at neo.co.tz  Sat Jan  1 12:06:44 2022
From: noah at neo.co.tz (Noah)
Date: Sat, 1 Jan 2022 15:06:44 +0300
Subject: [Community-Discuss] [apnic-talk]Re: [arin-ppml] Update on
 Litigation Between AFRINIC and Cloud Innovation ltd
In-Reply-To: <CANanHixhRrs=UVzTFwS0HfWosMLuxpiUTr8CqimhH68wetJGZw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <08910347-184C-4995-B743-78ED69C4FE72@gmail.com>
 <B6EE0DF9-3580-4322-8156-5FDD553AFD9E@me.com>
 <CANanHixhRrs=UVzTFwS0HfWosMLuxpiUTr8CqimhH68wetJGZw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAEqgTWY7W0O4bS5fMsXLchaDvxPXMLyr+s0JCL9KZ4Gb0251ew@mail.gmail.com>

On Sat, 1 Jan 2022, 14:50 Ibeanusi Elvis, <ibeanusielvis at gmail.com> wrote:

> Barry,
>
> As I earlier stated, offensive to me.
>

No dude,

Ignorance is not an offence. Ignorance is lack of awareness or knowledge
about something. Something close to stupidity.

RFG stated that you are either
ignorant or pretending to be ignorant of  "sockpuppets and astroturfing"

You were lamenting about sockpuppets being called out and Ronny responded
inline with your concerns. If people are real, its important for them to
introduce themselves and atleast state their affiliation to avoid being
thought for as sockpuppets especially when posting from gmail.com addresses.

Are you saying that being referred to as ignorant or pretending to be
ignorant is an offence?

I am sometimes ignorant of things and I have been told as such and I didn't
find being told that I am stupid and being made aware as an act of offense.
Its education.

Noah
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20220101/9877af84/attachment.html>

From barry.macharia at me.com  Sat Jan  1 12:21:03 2022
From: barry.macharia at me.com (Barry Macharia)
Date: Sat, 1 Jan 2022 15:21:03 +0300
Subject: [Community-Discuss] [apnic-talk]Re: [arin-ppml] Update on
	Litigation Between AFRINIC and Cloud Innovation ltd
In-Reply-To: <CANanHixhRrs=UVzTFwS0HfWosMLuxpiUTr8CqimhH68wetJGZw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CANanHixhRrs=UVzTFwS0HfWosMLuxpiUTr8CqimhH68wetJGZw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <58495749-5D0D-4EE7-BEF6-8D90E0063B11@me.com>

Elvis , 
So , if its only( you and some imaginary people )that finds it offensive, the whole community should acknowledge and act on it right????

snap out of it 

Barry - Resource Holder 




> On 1 Jan 2022, at 14:45, Ibeanusi Elvis <ibeanusielvis at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> ?
> Barry, 
> 
> As I earlier stated, offensive to me. 
> 
> Regards, 
> Elvis. 
> 
>> On Sat, Jan 1, 2022 at 18:36 Barry Macharia <barry.macharia at me.com> wrote:
>> Elvis , 
>> 
>> Offensive to who ????? 
>> 
>> 
>> Barry 
>> > On 1 Jan 2022, at 09:27, Ibeanusi Elvis <ibeanusielvis at gmail.com> wrote:
>> > 
>> > ?Indeed Ronald?s statements were offensive and defamatory. Which violates the AFRINIC Code of Conduct in section B; 2, 3 and 4. 
>> > To be exact, his statement against me referring to me as IGNORANT
>> > 
>> >      "Sockpuppetry is not an "ideology".  It is a well-established fact of life
>> >      on the modern Internet, just as "astroturfing" is in real life.  If you
>> >      don't know that then it is because either you are ignorant or else it is
>> >      because you are pretending to be ignorant? 
>> > 
>> > Additionally, defamatory as he infers that the people in the community are not ?REAL PEOPLE?. 
>> > The community is of course open-minded to criticism, we are not always going to agree with each other but we can be and have opposite perspectives but I believe there are better ways to disagree than being offensive, defamatory, and violating the Code of Conduct. 
>> > 
>> > Best regards,
>> > Elvis. 
>> > 
>> >> On Dec 31, 2021, at 23:36, Frank Habicht <geier at geier.ne.tz> wrote:
>> >> 
>> >>> On 31/12/2021 16:45, Cheken Chetty wrote:
>> >>> Good day all, chairs,
>> >>> I would like to call out a violation of the Code of Conduct by Ronald. His statements are clearly against section B, numbers 2, 3 and 4 within the AFRINIC code of conduct. His actions and statements are defamatory and quite offensive.
>> >>> Regards
>> >> 
>> >> Hi Cheken Chetty,
>> >> 
>> >> Please assist to state any affiliation of concern you have and assist to clarify :
>> >> - who is defamed
>> >> - who is offended
>> >> 
>> >> Thanks,
>> >> Frank
>> >> 
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> Community-Discuss mailing list
>> >> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
>> >> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>> > 
>> > 
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Community-Discuss mailing list
>> > Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
>> > https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20220101/832a015b/attachment.html>

From dndannang at gmail.com  Sat Jan  1 12:33:14 2022
From: dndannang at gmail.com (DANIEL NANGHAKA)
Date: Sat, 1 Jan 2022 15:33:14 +0300
Subject: [Community-Discuss] [apnic-talk]Re: [arin-ppml] Update on
 Litigation Between AFRINIC and Cloud Innovation ltd
In-Reply-To: <58495749-5D0D-4EE7-BEF6-8D90E0063B11@me.com>
References: <CANanHixhRrs=UVzTFwS0HfWosMLuxpiUTr8CqimhH68wetJGZw@mail.gmail.com>
 <58495749-5D0D-4EE7-BEF6-8D90E0063B11@me.com>
Message-ID: <CAD4W+iMZjQNA6nJQ0-37Z0+rNXBn0=tx8NJizi+XvUiE4cCT6Q@mail.gmail.com>

The puppets are so many and seek attention.

I just see a bunch of distractors and attention seekers.



On Sat, Jan 1, 2022, 3:21 PM Barry Macharia via Community-Discuss <
community-discuss at afrinic.net> wrote:

> Elvis ,
> So , if its only( you and some imaginary people )that finds it offensive,
> the whole community should acknowledge and act on it right????
>
> snap out of it
>
> Barry - Resource Holder
>
>
>
>
> On 1 Jan 2022, at 14:45, Ibeanusi Elvis <ibeanusielvis at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> ?
> Barry,
>
> As I earlier stated, offensive to me.
>
> Regards,
> Elvis.
>
> On Sat, Jan 1, 2022 at 18:36 Barry Macharia <barry.macharia at me.com> wrote:
>
>> Elvis ,
>>
>> Offensive to who ?????
>>
>>
>> Barry
>> > On 1 Jan 2022, at 09:27, Ibeanusi Elvis <ibeanusielvis at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > ?Indeed Ronald?s statements were offensive and defamatory. Which
>> violates the AFRINIC Code of Conduct in section B; 2, 3 and 4.
>> > To be exact, his statement against me referring to me as IGNORANT
>> >
>> >      "Sockpuppetry is not an "ideology".  It is a well-established fact
>> of life
>> >      on the modern Internet, just as "astroturfing" is in real life.
>> If you
>> >      don't know that then it is because either you are ignorant or else
>> it is
>> >      because you are pretending to be ignorant?
>> >
>> > Additionally, defamatory as he infers that the people in the community
>> are not ?REAL PEOPLE?.
>> > The community is of course open-minded to criticism, we are not always
>> going to agree with each other but we can be and have opposite perspectives
>> but I believe there are better ways to disagree than being offensive,
>> defamatory, and violating the Code of Conduct.
>> >
>> > Best regards,
>> > Elvis.
>> >
>> >> On Dec 31, 2021, at 23:36, Frank Habicht <geier at geier.ne.tz> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> On 31/12/2021 16:45, Cheken Chetty wrote:
>> >>> Good day all, chairs,
>> >>> I would like to call out a violation of the Code of Conduct by
>> Ronald. His statements are clearly against section B, numbers 2, 3 and 4
>> within the AFRINIC code of conduct. His actions and statements are
>> defamatory and quite offensive.
>> >>> Regards
>> >>
>> >> Hi Cheken Chetty,
>> >>
>> >> Please assist to state any affiliation of concern you have and assist
>> to clarify :
>> >> - who is defamed
>> >> - who is offended
>> >>
>> >> Thanks,
>> >> Frank
>> >>
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> Community-Discuss mailing list
>> >> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
>> >> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>> >
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Community-Discuss mailing list
>> > Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
>> > https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20220101/f911e268/attachment.html>

From noah at neo.co.tz  Tue Jan  4 13:20:52 2022
From: noah at neo.co.tz (Noah)
Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2022 16:20:52 +0300
Subject: [Community-Discuss] Fwd: DEFAMATION AGAINST MR. LU HENG :-/
Message-ID: <CAEqgTWZJGoZJRrwu=miGL0z63rBzxEA7Q+NepwnAS6XGH7NdOA@mail.gmail.com>

Dear Community,

So while enjoying the festive holidays, I got served with a seize and
desist by counsels of you know who? Well email read "Le Heng" who I suppose
they meant, Lu Heng.

Well ofcourse I resisted and the rational is simple imho.

How come Lu Heng is accusing me of defamation for statements made on
AFRINIC specific public discussion mailinglists and forum (
https://afrinic.net/email/amp):

As we all know, these public forums allow for contradictory discussions
allowing Lu Heng and Cloud Innovation Ltd/Larus Limited to respond and
provide their views and arguments.

Cheers,
Noah

- **If you think you are too small to make a difference you haven't spent a
night with a mosquito**.


---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Lupi, Isaac <isaac.lupi at dentons.co.tz>
Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2021, 18:56
Subject: DEFAMATION AGAINST MR. LU HENG
To: noah at neo.co.tz <noah at neo.co.tz>,
Cc: Sipemba, Thomas <

Dear Noah,

We are attorneys instructed to represent Mr. Le Heng in relation to your
defamatory statements to him. Please find attached a self-explanatory
demand letter for your actioning. We look forward to hearing from you at
your earliest possible convenience, in any event not more that *seven (7)
days* from the date of this demand. A hard copy of the letter will be hand
delivered to your address in due course.



Kind regards,


Isaac Lupi
Junior Associate
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20220104/f71d55e6/attachment.html>

From boubakarbarry at gmail.com  Tue Jan  4 13:35:18 2022
From: boubakarbarry at gmail.com (Boubakar Barry)
Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2022 13:35:18 +0000
Subject: [Community-Discuss] Fwd: DEFAMATION AGAINST MR. LU HENG :-/
In-Reply-To: <CAEqgTWZJGoZJRrwu=miGL0z63rBzxEA7Q+NepwnAS6XGH7NdOA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAEqgTWZJGoZJRrwu=miGL0z63rBzxEA7Q+NepwnAS6XGH7NdOA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAGrBSShAmEJXESLWm95Z05T+dqNXQ98yJM+qHEgSj96nPOLMmQ@mail.gmail.com>

Truth and community are stronger than Le Heng or Lu Heng.

Boubakar

On Tue, Jan 4, 2022 at 1:22 PM Noah <noah at neo.co.tz> wrote:

> Dear Community,
>
> So while enjoying the festive holidays, I got served with a seize and
> desist by counsels of you know who? Well email read "Le Heng" who I suppose
> they meant, Lu Heng.
>
> Well ofcourse I resisted and the rational is simple imho.
>
> How come Lu Heng is accusing me of defamation for statements made on
> AFRINIC specific public discussion mailinglists and forum (
> https://afrinic.net/email/amp):
>
> As we all know, these public forums allow for contradictory discussions
> allowing Lu Heng and Cloud Innovation Ltd/Larus Limited to respond and
> provide their views and arguments.
>
> Cheers,
> Noah
>
> - **If you think you are too small to make a difference you haven't spent
> a night with a mosquito**.
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ---------
> From: Lupi, Isaac <isaac.lupi at dentons.co.tz>
> Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2021, 18:56
> Subject: DEFAMATION AGAINST MR. LU HENG
> To: noah at neo.co.tz <noah at neo.co.tz>,
> Cc: Sipemba, Thomas <
>
> Dear Noah,
>
> We are attorneys instructed to represent Mr. Le Heng in relation to your
> defamatory statements to him. Please find attached a self-explanatory
> demand letter for your actioning. We look forward to hearing from you at
> your earliest possible convenience, in any event not more that *seven (7)
> days* from the date of this demand. A hard copy of the letter will be
> hand delivered to your address in due course.
>
>
>
> Kind regards,
>
>
> Isaac Lupi
> Junior Associate
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20220104/ceed7c84/attachment.html>

From Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com  Tue Jan  4 13:37:00 2022
From: Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com (Andrew Alston)
Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2022 13:37:00 +0000
Subject: [Community-Discuss] Fwd: DEFAMATION AGAINST MR. LU HENG :-/
In-Reply-To: <CAEqgTWZJGoZJRrwu=miGL0z63rBzxEA7Q+NepwnAS6XGH7NdOA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAEqgTWZJGoZJRrwu=miGL0z63rBzxEA7Q+NepwnAS6XGH7NdOA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AM7PR03MB64518A46B25E70559984BE69EE4A9@AM7PR03MB6451.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>

Firstly ? generally not a good idea to air such things on a public mailing list ? that?s just common sense.
Secondly ? there is a vast difference between a contradictory view ? and calling someone a criminal when they have not been found guilty of any crime ? the former is acceptable ? the latter is defamatory.
Thirdly ? right or wrong ? win or lose ? legal battles ? can cost a hell of a lot of money ? and generally are a good idea to avoid them when you can do so, lest you end up bankrupt

Andrew



From: Noah <noah at neo.co.tz>
Sent: Tuesday, January 4, 2022 4:21 PM
To: General Discussions of AFRINIC <community-discuss at afrinic.net>
Subject: [Community-Discuss] Fwd: DEFAMATION AGAINST MR. LU HENG :-/

Dear Community,

So while enjoying the festive holidays, I got served with a seize and desist by counsels of you know who? Well email read "Le Heng" who I suppose they meant, Lu Heng.

Well ofcourse I resisted and the rational is simple imho.

How come Lu Heng is accusing me of defamation for statements made on AFRINIC specific public discussion mailinglists and forum ( https://afrinic.net/email/amp<https://afrinic.net/email/amp>):

As we all know, these public forums allow for contradictory discussions allowing Lu Heng and Cloud Innovation Ltd/Larus Limited to respond and provide their views and arguments.

Cheers,
Noah

- **If you think you are too small to make a difference you haven't spent a night with a mosquito**.


---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Lupi, Isaac <isaac.lupi at dentons.co.tz<mailto:isaac.lupi at dentons.co.tz>>
Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2021, 18:56
Subject: DEFAMATION AGAINST MR. LU HENG
To: noah at neo.co.tz<mailto:noah at neo.co.tz> <noah at neo.co.tz<mailto:noah at neo.co.tz>>,
Cc: Sipemba, Thomas <
Dear Noah,
We are attorneys instructed to represent Mr. Le Heng in relation to your defamatory statements to him. Please find attached a self-explanatory demand letter for your actioning. We look forward to hearing from you at your earliest possible convenience, in any event not more that seven (7) days from the date of this demand. A hard copy of the letter will be hand delivered to your address in due course.

Kind regards,
[cid:image001.png at 01D7F377.C34E37E0]

Isaac Lupi
Junior Associate


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20220104/3de0286f/attachment.html>

From boubakarbarry at gmail.com  Tue Jan  4 13:44:29 2022
From: boubakarbarry at gmail.com (Boubakar Barry)
Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2022 13:44:29 +0000
Subject: [Community-Discuss] Fwd: DEFAMATION AGAINST MR. LU HENG :-/
In-Reply-To: <AM7PR03MB64518A46B25E70559984BE69EE4A9@AM7PR03MB6451.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
References: <CAEqgTWZJGoZJRrwu=miGL0z63rBzxEA7Q+NepwnAS6XGH7NdOA@mail.gmail.com>
 <AM7PR03MB64518A46B25E70559984BE69EE4A9@AM7PR03MB6451.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
Message-ID: <CAGrBSSh=CXjkJ+-5AUtC+e6kCOFSeLudJKSqJUDmPJte_OqNkg@mail.gmail.com>

Are you suggesting that people have to shut up because they don't have the
money to pay attorneys? Total nonsense!

This is not the spirit of this community.

Boubakar


On Tue, Jan 4, 2022 at 1:37 PM Andrew Alston via Community-Discuss <
community-discuss at afrinic.net> wrote:

> Firstly ? generally not a good idea to air such things on a public mailing
> list ? that?s just common sense.
>
> Secondly ? there is a vast difference between a contradictory view ? and
> calling someone a criminal when they have not been found guilty of any
> crime ? the former is acceptable ? the latter is defamatory.
>
> Thirdly ? right or wrong ? win or lose ? legal battles ? can cost a hell
> of a lot of money ? and generally are a good idea to avoid them when you
> can do so, lest you end up bankrupt
>
>
>
> Andrew
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Noah <noah at neo.co.tz>
> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 4, 2022 4:21 PM
> *To:* General Discussions of AFRINIC <community-discuss at afrinic.net>
> *Subject:* [Community-Discuss] Fwd: DEFAMATION AGAINST MR. LU HENG :-/
>
>
>
> Dear Community,
>
>
>
> So while enjoying the festive holidays, I got served with a seize and
> desist by counsels of you know who? Well email read "Le Heng" who I suppose
> they meant, Lu Heng.
>
>
>
> Well ofcourse I resisted and the rational is simple imho.
>
>
>
> How come Lu Heng is accusing me of defamation for statements made on
> AFRINIC specific public discussion mailinglists and forum (
> https://afrinic.net/email/amp):
>
>
>
> As we all know, these public forums allow for contradictory discussions
> allowing Lu Heng and Cloud Innovation Ltd/Larus Limited to respond and
> provide their views and arguments.
>
>
>
> Cheers,
>
> Noah
>
>
>
> - **If you think you are too small to make a difference you haven't spent
> a night with a mosquito**.
>
>
>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ---------
> From: *Lupi, Isaac* <isaac.lupi at dentons.co.tz>
> Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2021, 18:56
> Subject: DEFAMATION AGAINST MR. LU HENG
> To: noah at neo.co.tz <noah at neo.co.tz>,
> Cc: Sipemba, Thomas <
>
> Dear Noah,
>
> We are attorneys instructed to represent Mr. Le Heng in relation to your
> defamatory statements to him. Please find attached a self-explanatory
> demand letter for your actioning. We look forward to hearing from you at
> your earliest possible convenience, in any event not more that *seven (7)
> days* from the date of this demand. A hard copy of the letter will be
> hand delivered to your address in due course.
>
>
>
> Kind regards,
>
>
> Isaac Lupi
> Junior Associate
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20220104/5303d27c/attachment.html>

From dmurungi at wia.co.tz  Tue Jan  4 13:58:39 2022
From: dmurungi at wia.co.tz (Murungi Daniel)
Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2022 16:58:39 +0300
Subject: [Community-Discuss] DEFAMATION AGAINST MR. LU HENG :-/
In-Reply-To: <CAGrBSShAmEJXESLWm95Z05T+dqNXQ98yJM+qHEgSj96nPOLMmQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAEqgTWZJGoZJRrwu=miGL0z63rBzxEA7Q+NepwnAS6XGH7NdOA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAGrBSShAmEJXESLWm95Z05T+dqNXQ98yJM+qHEgSj96nPOLMmQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <E49D7651-411C-4B68-8777-3B75DF064BC7@wia.co.tz>

Definitely.

This is an attempt to silence a member and sow fear within the community. Truth is definitely stronger. The community will be stronger once we pluck out the weeds from amongst us.

Regards,
Daniel


> On Jan 4, 2022, at 4:35 PM, Boubakar Barry <boubakarbarry at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Truth and community are stronger than Le Heng or Lu Heng.
> 
> Boubakar
> 
> On Tue, Jan 4, 2022 at 1:22 PM Noah <noah at neo.co.tz <mailto:noah at neo.co.tz>> wrote:
> Dear Community,
> 
> So while enjoying the festive holidays, I got served with a seize and desist by counsels of you know who? Well email read "Le Heng" who I suppose they meant, Lu Heng.
> 
> Well ofcourse I resisted and the rational is simple imho.
> 
> How come Lu Heng is accusing me of defamation for statements made on AFRINIC specific public discussion mailinglists and forum ( https://afrinic.net/email/amp <https://afrinic.net/email/amp>):
> 
> As we all know, these public forums allow for contradictory discussions allowing Lu Heng and Cloud Innovation Ltd/Larus Limited to respond and provide their views and arguments. 
> 
> Cheers,
> Noah
> 
> - **If you think you are too small to make a difference you haven't spent a night with a mosquito**.
> 
> 
> ---------- Forwarded message ---------
> From: Lupi, Isaac <isaac.lupi at dentons.co.tz <mailto:isaac.lupi at dentons.co.tz>>
> Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2021, 18:56
> Subject: DEFAMATION AGAINST MR. LU HENG
> To: noah at neo.co.tz <mailto:noah at neo.co.tz> <noah at neo.co.tz <mailto:noah at neo.co.tz>>,
> Cc: Sipemba, Thomas <
> Dear Noah,
> 
> We are attorneys instructed to represent Mr. Le Heng in relation to your defamatory statements to him. Please find attached a self-explanatory demand letter for your actioning. We look forward to hearing from you at your earliest possible convenience, in any event not more that seven (7) days from the date of this demand. A hard copy of the letter will be hand delivered to your address in due course.
> 
>  
> 
> Kind regards,
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Isaac Lupi
> Junior Associate
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net <mailto:Community-Discuss at afrinic.net>
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss <https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss>
> _______________________________________________
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20220104/bb09d804/attachment.html>

From mathanyawork at gmail.com  Tue Jan  4 15:26:02 2022
From: mathanyawork at gmail.com (Mathanya Ramaboea)
Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2022 16:26:02 +0100
Subject: [Community-Discuss]  Fwd: DEFAMATION AGAINST MR. LU HENG :-/
In-Reply-To: <AM7PR03MB64518A46B25E70559984BE69EE4A9@AM7PR03MB6451.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
References: <CAEqgTWZJGoZJRrwu=miGL0z63rBzxEA7Q+NepwnAS6XGH7NdOA@mail.gmail.com>
 <AM7PR03MB64518A46B25E70559984BE69EE4A9@AM7PR03MB6451.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
Message-ID: <CAA7BfSK1ZSEyDLpf1TGzw5aMdk5KoqkCDTX_TD_AOvUqejUg+w@mail.gmail.com>

+1

On Tuesday, 4 January 2022, Andrew Alston via Community-Discuss <
community-discuss at afrinic.net> wrote:

> Firstly ? generally not a good idea to air such things on a public mailing
> list ? that?s just common sense.
>
> Secondly ? there is a vast difference between a contradictory view ? and
> calling someone a criminal when they have not been found guilty of any
> crime ? the former is acceptable ? the latter is defamatory.
>
> Thirdly ? right or wrong ? win or lose ? legal battles ? can cost a hell
> of a lot of money ? and generally are a good idea to avoid them when you
> can do so, lest you end up bankrupt
>
>
>
> Andrew
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Noah <noah at neo.co.tz>
> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 4, 2022 4:21 PM
> *To:* General Discussions of AFRINIC <community-discuss at afrinic.net>
> *Subject:* [Community-Discuss] Fwd: DEFAMATION AGAINST MR. LU HENG :-/
>
>
>
> Dear Community,
>
>
>
> So while enjoying the festive holidays, I got served with a seize and
> desist by counsels of you know who? Well email read "Le Heng" who I suppose
> they meant, Lu Heng.
>
>
>
> Well ofcourse I resisted and the rational is simple imho.
>
>
>
> How come Lu Heng is accusing me of defamation for statements made on
> AFRINIC specific public discussion mailinglists and forum (
> https://afrinic.net/email/amp):
>
>
>
> As we all know, these public forums allow for contradictory discussions
> allowing Lu Heng and Cloud Innovation Ltd/Larus Limited to respond and
> provide their views and arguments.
>
>
>
> Cheers,
>
> Noah
>
>
>
> - **If you think you are too small to make a difference you haven't spent
> a night with a mosquito**.
>
>
>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ---------
> From: *Lupi, Isaac* <isaac.lupi at dentons.co.tz>
> Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2021, 18:56
> Subject: DEFAMATION AGAINST MR. LU HENG
> To: noah at neo.co.tz <noah at neo.co.tz>,
> Cc: Sipemba, Thomas <
>
> Dear Noah,
>
> We are attorneys instructed to represent Mr. Le Heng in relation to your
> defamatory statements to him. Please find attached a self-explanatory
> demand letter for your actioning. We look forward to hearing from you at
> your earliest possible convenience, in any event not more that *seven (7)
> days* from the date of this demand. A hard copy of the letter will be
> hand delivered to your address in due course.
>
>
>
> Kind regards,
>
>
> Isaac Lupi
> Junior Associate
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20220104/b59a69e7/attachment.html>

From noah at neo.co.tz  Tue Jan  4 15:54:54 2022
From: noah at neo.co.tz (Noah)
Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2022 18:54:54 +0300
Subject: [Community-Discuss] Fwd: DEFAMATION AGAINST MR. LU HENG :-/
In-Reply-To: <AM7PR03MB64518A46B25E70559984BE69EE4A9@AM7PR03MB6451.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
References: <CAEqgTWZJGoZJRrwu=miGL0z63rBzxEA7Q+NepwnAS6XGH7NdOA@mail.gmail.com>
 <AM7PR03MB64518A46B25E70559984BE69EE4A9@AM7PR03MB6451.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
Message-ID: <CAEqgTWatmXws7Hx-8iqQfTiAE7=fwke8bVA_PEgju5g=jqLjog@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, 4 Jan 2022, 16:37 Andrew Alston, <Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com>
wrote:

> Firstly ? generally not a good idea to air such things on a public mailing
> list ? that?s just common sense.
>

Something similar was sent to ZANOG public list a while back. Was it
generally not a good idea?

In any case, I was not born in the dark.

Secondly ? there is a vast difference between a contradictory view ? and
> calling someone a criminal when they have not been found guilty of any
> crime ? the former is acceptable ? the latter is defamatory.
>

Mr.Counsel Alston.... dont put words in peoples mouths.

Who was called a criminal?

Thirdly ? right or wrong ? win or lose ? legal battles ? can cost a hell of
> a lot of money ? and generally are a good idea to avoid them when you can
> do so, lest you end up bankrupt
>
>
>
> Andrew
>

You are fond of big words and exaggerations as usual.

Noah

>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Noah <noah at neo.co.tz>
> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 4, 2022 4:21 PM
> *To:* General Discussions of AFRINIC <community-discuss at afrinic.net>
> *Subject:* [Community-Discuss] Fwd: DEFAMATION AGAINST MR. LU HENG :-/
>
>
>
> Dear Community,
>
>
>
> So while enjoying the festive holidays, I got served with a seize and
> desist by counsels of you know who? Well email read "Le Heng" who I suppose
> they meant, Lu Heng.
>
>
>
> Well ofcourse I resisted and the rational is simple imho.
>
>
>
> How come Lu Heng is accusing me of defamation for statements made on
> AFRINIC specific public discussion mailinglists and forum (
> https://afrinic.net/email/amp):
>
>
>
> As we all know, these public forums allow for contradictory discussions
> allowing Lu Heng and Cloud Innovation Ltd/Larus Limited to respond and
> provide their views and arguments.
>
>
>
> Cheers,
>
> Noah
>
>
>
> - **If you think you are too small to make a difference you haven't spent
> a night with a mosquito**.
>
>
>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ---------
> From: *Lupi, Isaac* <isaac.lupi at dentons.co.tz>
> Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2021, 18:56
> Subject: DEFAMATION AGAINST MR. LU HENG
> To: noah at neo.co.tz <noah at neo.co.tz>,
> Cc: Sipemba, Thomas <
>
> Dear Noah,
>
> We are attorneys instructed to represent Mr. Le Heng in relation to your
> defamatory statements to him. Please find attached a self-explanatory
> demand letter for your actioning. We look forward to hearing from you at
> your earliest possible convenience, in any event not more that *seven (7)
> days* from the date of this demand. A hard copy of the letter will be
> hand delivered to your address in due course.
>
>
>
> Kind regards,
>
>
> Isaac Lupi
> Junior Associate
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20220104/15109915/attachment.html>

From noah at neo.co.tz  Tue Jan  4 15:58:30 2022
From: noah at neo.co.tz (Noah)
Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2022 18:58:30 +0300
Subject: [Community-Discuss] DEFAMATION AGAINST MR. LU HENG :-/
In-Reply-To: <E49D7651-411C-4B68-8777-3B75DF064BC7@wia.co.tz>
References: <CAEqgTWZJGoZJRrwu=miGL0z63rBzxEA7Q+NepwnAS6XGH7NdOA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAGrBSShAmEJXESLWm95Z05T+dqNXQ98yJM+qHEgSj96nPOLMmQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <E49D7651-411C-4B68-8777-3B75DF064BC7@wia.co.tz>
Message-ID: <CAEqgTWaN3GteJ3qyPhgEoj7qBSFkqSDMDX3bUop-Cb6ma8rouQ@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, 4 Jan 2022, 16:58 Murungi Daniel, <dmurungi at wia.co.tz> wrote:

> Definitely.
>
> This is an attempt to silence a member and sow fear within the community.
>

There is an African proverb that goes - "A Man Who Uses Force Is Afraid of
Reasoning".


Truth is definitely stronger.
>

Always stay on the path of truth :-)

Cheers
Noah
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20220104/0daf5acb/attachment.html>

From seraheazy at gmail.com  Tue Jan  4 16:38:39 2022
From: seraheazy at gmail.com (Serah Eazy Oluwabunmi)
Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2022 17:38:39 +0100
Subject: [Community-Discuss] Fwd: DEFAMATION AGAINST MR. LU HENG :-/
In-Reply-To: <CAEqgTWZJGoZJRrwu=miGL0z63rBzxEA7Q+NepwnAS6XGH7NdOA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAEqgTWZJGoZJRrwu=miGL0z63rBzxEA7Q+NepwnAS6XGH7NdOA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAOCmvP=LjXmXvqe9n6nrEGd47zf7hKtn6gCowijitLxDqz8vgQ@mail.gmail.com>

Indeed, public forums do allow for contradictory discussions. But if the
mailing lists moderators turn a blind eye to whatever personal attacks that
are constantly taking place, the individual offended still has the whole
right to deal with it however he would like.
if you insist that there was no act of defamation from your side, why and
on what base would the attorneys be able to issue such letter to you
specifically? They must have included proof from whatever posts/emails they
were referring to.

Oluwabunmi

On Tue, Jan 4, 2022, 2:22 PM Noah <noah at neo.co.tz> wrote:

> Dear Community,
>
> So while enjoying the festive holidays, I got served with a seize and
> desist by counsels of you know who? Well email read "Le Heng" who I suppose
> they meant, Lu Heng.
>
> Well ofcourse I resisted and the rational is simple imho.
>
> How come Lu Heng is accusing me of defamation for statements made on
> AFRINIC specific public discussion mailinglists and forum (
> https://afrinic.net/email/amp):
>
> As we all know, these public forums allow for contradictory discussions
> allowing Lu Heng and Cloud Innovation Ltd/Larus Limited to respond and
> provide their views and arguments.
>
> Cheers,
> Noah
>
> - **If you think you are too small to make a difference you haven't spent
> a night with a mosquito**.
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ---------
> From: Lupi, Isaac <isaac.lupi at dentons.co.tz>
> Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2021, 18:56
> Subject: DEFAMATION AGAINST MR. LU HENG
> To: noah at neo.co.tz <noah at neo.co.tz>,
> Cc: Sipemba, Thomas <
>
> Dear Noah,
>
> We are attorneys instructed to represent Mr. Le Heng in relation to your
> defamatory statements to him. Please find attached a self-explanatory
> demand letter for your actioning. We look forward to hearing from you at
> your earliest possible convenience, in any event not more that *seven (7)
> days* from the date of this demand. A hard copy of the letter will be
> hand delivered to your address in due course.
>
>
>
> Kind regards,
>
>
> Isaac Lupi
> Junior Associate
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20220104/b37329cc/attachment.html>

From siyuan at misaka.io  Tue Jan  4 16:57:11 2022
From: siyuan at misaka.io (Siyuan Miao)
Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2022 00:57:11 +0800
Subject: [Community-Discuss] Fwd: DEFAMATION AGAINST MR. LU HENG :-/
In-Reply-To: <CAOCmvP=LjXmXvqe9n6nrEGd47zf7hKtn6gCowijitLxDqz8vgQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAEqgTWZJGoZJRrwu=miGL0z63rBzxEA7Q+NepwnAS6XGH7NdOA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAOCmvP=LjXmXvqe9n6nrEGd47zf7hKtn6gCowijitLxDqz8vgQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAO3CAMpPySJfm=z-wf39eVLkK7rcOKSno3TgtsMQ074L23i9bQ@mail.gmail.com>

Dear community,

It might be off-topic but should we only allow people with company email to
discuss here?

There are always mysterious people with gmail.com email addresses
supporting Larus / Cloud Innovation and you can't even find any other
records when you Google their name or email address.

Regards,
Siyuan

On Wed, Jan 5, 2022 at 12:44 AM Serah Eazy Oluwabunmi <seraheazy at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Indeed, public forums do allow for contradictory discussions. But if the
> mailing lists moderators turn a blind eye to whatever personal attacks that
> are constantly taking place, the individual offended still has the whole
> right to deal with it however he would like.
> if you insist that there was no act of defamation from your side, why and
> on what base would the attorneys be able to issue such letter to you
> specifically? They must have included proof from whatever posts/emails they
> were referring to.
>
> Oluwabunmi
>
> On Tue, Jan 4, 2022, 2:22 PM Noah <noah at neo.co.tz> wrote:
>
>> Dear Community,
>>
>> So while enjoying the festive holidays, I got served with a seize and
>> desist by counsels of you know who? Well email read "Le Heng" who I suppose
>> they meant, Lu Heng.
>>
>> Well ofcourse I resisted and the rational is simple imho.
>>
>> How come Lu Heng is accusing me of defamation for statements made on
>> AFRINIC specific public discussion mailinglists and forum (
>> https://afrinic.net/email/amp):
>>
>> As we all know, these public forums allow for contradictory discussions
>> allowing Lu Heng and Cloud Innovation Ltd/Larus Limited to respond and
>> provide their views and arguments.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Noah
>>
>> - **If you think you are too small to make a difference you haven't spent
>> a night with a mosquito**.
>>
>>
>> ---------- Forwarded message ---------
>> From: Lupi, Isaac <isaac.lupi at dentons.co.tz>
>> Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2021, 18:56
>> Subject: DEFAMATION AGAINST MR. LU HENG
>> To: noah at neo.co.tz <noah at neo.co.tz>,
>> Cc: Sipemba, Thomas <
>>
>> Dear Noah,
>>
>> We are attorneys instructed to represent Mr. Le Heng in relation to your
>> defamatory statements to him. Please find attached a self-explanatory
>> demand letter for your actioning. We look forward to hearing from you at
>> your earliest possible convenience, in any event not more that *seven
>> (7) days* from the date of this demand. A hard copy of the letter will
>> be hand delivered to your address in due course.
>>
>>
>>
>> Kind regards,
>>
>>
>> Isaac Lupi
>> Junior Associate
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Community-Discuss mailing list
>> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
>> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20220105/b5cad39b/attachment.html>

From noah at neo.co.tz  Tue Jan  4 17:09:17 2022
From: noah at neo.co.tz (Noah)
Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2022 20:09:17 +0300
Subject: [Community-Discuss] Fwd: DEFAMATION AGAINST MR. LU HENG :-/
In-Reply-To: <CAOCmvP=LjXmXvqe9n6nrEGd47zf7hKtn6gCowijitLxDqz8vgQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAEqgTWZJGoZJRrwu=miGL0z63rBzxEA7Q+NepwnAS6XGH7NdOA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAOCmvP=LjXmXvqe9n6nrEGd47zf7hKtn6gCowijitLxDqz8vgQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAEqgTWbDsST2Ve5TEvFySNRg5ye9QMWf8ZAr2Vb5dwB31LUt8w@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, 4 Jan 2022, 19:37 Serah Eazy Oluwabunmi, <seraheazy at gmail.com>
wrote:

>
>

They must have included proof from whatever posts/emails they were
> referring to.
>
> Oluwabunmi
>

My posts are public on various mailing lists dating as back as 2007. If you
find one which are defamatory, please let me know :-).

Noah
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20220104/6252f0a0/attachment.html>

From Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com  Tue Jan  4 17:39:29 2022
From: Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com (Andrew Alston)
Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2022 17:39:29 +0000
Subject: [Community-Discuss] Fwd: DEFAMATION AGAINST MR. LU HENG :-/
In-Reply-To: <CAGrBSSh=CXjkJ+-5AUtC+e6kCOFSeLudJKSqJUDmPJte_OqNkg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAEqgTWZJGoZJRrwu=miGL0z63rBzxEA7Q+NepwnAS6XGH7NdOA@mail.gmail.com>
 <AM7PR03MB64518A46B25E70559984BE69EE4A9@AM7PR03MB6451.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
 <CAGrBSSh=CXjkJ+-5AUtC+e6kCOFSeLudJKSqJUDmPJte_OqNkg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AM7PR03MB6451B4BF11F0572C45959465EE4A9@AM7PR03MB6451.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>

No - I?m suggesting people don?t defame others and break the law by making statements that fall into the category of libel or defamation - and if they choose to do so - then they accept the consequences.

Calling someone a criminal in a public forum without any charges having been filed or proven - is defamatory.  It?s pretty simple really - just - don?t do it

Andrew

Get Outlook for iOS<https://aka.ms/o0ukef>
________________________________
From: Boubakar Barry <boubakarbarry at gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, January 4, 2022 4:44:29 PM
To: Andrew Alston <Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com>
Cc: Noah <noah at neo.co.tz>; General Discussions of AFRINIC <community-discuss at afrinic.net>
Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] Fwd: DEFAMATION AGAINST MR. LU HENG :-/

Are you suggesting that people have to shut up because they don't have the money to pay attorneys? Total nonsense!

This is not the spirit of this community.

Boubakar


On Tue, Jan 4, 2022 at 1:37 PM Andrew Alston via Community-Discuss <community-discuss at afrinic.net<mailto:community-discuss at afrinic.net>> wrote:

Firstly ? generally not a good idea to air such things on a public mailing list ? that?s just common sense.

Secondly ? there is a vast difference between a contradictory view ? and calling someone a criminal when they have not been found guilty of any crime ? the former is acceptable ? the latter is defamatory.

Thirdly ? right or wrong ? win or lose ? legal battles ? can cost a hell of a lot of money ? and generally are a good idea to avoid them when you can do so, lest you end up bankrupt



Andrew







From: Noah <noah at neo.co.tz<mailto:noah at neo.co.tz>>
Sent: Tuesday, January 4, 2022 4:21 PM
To: General Discussions of AFRINIC <community-discuss at afrinic.net<mailto:community-discuss at afrinic.net>>
Subject: [Community-Discuss] Fwd: DEFAMATION AGAINST MR. LU HENG :-/



Dear Community,



So while enjoying the festive holidays, I got served with a seize and desist by counsels of you know who? Well email read "Le Heng" who I suppose they meant, Lu Heng.



Well ofcourse I resisted and the rational is simple imho.



How come Lu Heng is accusing me of defamation for statements made on AFRINIC specific public discussion mailinglists and forum ( https://afrinic.net/email/amp<https://afrinic.net/email/amp>):



As we all know, these public forums allow for contradictory discussions allowing Lu Heng and Cloud Innovation Ltd/Larus Limited to respond and provide their views and arguments.



Cheers,

Noah



- **If you think you are too small to make a difference you haven't spent a night with a mosquito**.





---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Lupi, Isaac <isaac.lupi at dentons.co.tz<mailto:isaac.lupi at dentons.co.tz>>
Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2021, 18:56
Subject: DEFAMATION AGAINST MR. LU HENG
To: noah at neo.co.tz<mailto:noah at neo.co.tz> <noah at neo.co.tz<mailto:noah at neo.co.tz>>,
Cc: Sipemba, Thomas <

Dear Noah,

We are attorneys instructed to represent Mr. Le Heng in relation to your defamatory statements to him. Please find attached a self-explanatory demand letter for your actioning. We look forward to hearing from you at your earliest possible convenience, in any event not more that seven (7) days from the date of this demand. A hard copy of the letter will be hand delivered to your address in due course.



Kind regards,

[X]

Isaac Lupi
Junior Associate




_______________________________________________
Community-Discuss mailing list
Community-Discuss at afrinic.net<mailto:Community-Discuss at afrinic.net>
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss<https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20220104/8837388a/attachment.html>

From noah at neo.co.tz  Tue Jan  4 18:13:03 2022
From: noah at neo.co.tz (Noah)
Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2022 21:13:03 +0300
Subject: [Community-Discuss] Fwd: DEFAMATION AGAINST MR. LU HENG :-/
In-Reply-To: <AM7PR03MB6451B4BF11F0572C45959465EE4A9@AM7PR03MB6451.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
References: <CAEqgTWZJGoZJRrwu=miGL0z63rBzxEA7Q+NepwnAS6XGH7NdOA@mail.gmail.com>
 <AM7PR03MB64518A46B25E70559984BE69EE4A9@AM7PR03MB6451.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
 <CAGrBSSh=CXjkJ+-5AUtC+e6kCOFSeLudJKSqJUDmPJte_OqNkg@mail.gmail.com>
 <AM7PR03MB6451B4BF11F0572C45959465EE4A9@AM7PR03MB6451.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
Message-ID: <CAEqgTWau86Uypah7yibGx8RoO3X=b9JzB-JVrA8Ei8Y=-VDM=A@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, 4 Jan 2022, 20:39 Andrew Alston, <Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com>
wrote:

> No - I?m suggesting people don?t defame others and break the law by making
> statements that fall into the category of libel or defamation -
>

You have to prove the defamation claims before a competent court if you
were not aware.

and if they choose to do so - then they accept the consequences.
>

What consequences. Has there been a ruling in any competent court that
someone was actually defamed?

Your escalated and exaggerated statements are misleading.


> Calling someone a criminal in a public forum without any charges having
> been filed or proven - is defamatory.  It?s pretty simple really - just -
> don?t do it
>

Dont attempt to spread lies Andrew.

Who called who a criminal?

Can you prove your false statement above by providing evidence of the same?

Noah
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20220104/e045eab9/attachment.html>

From Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com  Tue Jan  4 19:47:18 2022
From: Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com (Andrew Alston)
Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2022 19:47:18 +0000
Subject: [Community-Discuss] Fwd: DEFAMATION AGAINST MR. LU HENG :-/
In-Reply-To: <CAEqgTWau86Uypah7yibGx8RoO3X=b9JzB-JVrA8Ei8Y=-VDM=A@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAEqgTWZJGoZJRrwu=miGL0z63rBzxEA7Q+NepwnAS6XGH7NdOA@mail.gmail.com>
 <AM7PR03MB64518A46B25E70559984BE69EE4A9@AM7PR03MB6451.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
 <CAGrBSSh=CXjkJ+-5AUtC+e6kCOFSeLudJKSqJUDmPJte_OqNkg@mail.gmail.com>
 <AM7PR03MB6451B4BF11F0572C45959465EE4A9@AM7PR03MB6451.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
 <CAEqgTWau86Uypah7yibGx8RoO3X=b9JzB-JVrA8Ei8Y=-VDM=A@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AM7PR03MB645198DDB50BE7BAF6256DFFEE4A9@AM7PR03MB6451.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>

Noah - I won?t entertain this thread any further because it?s not worth my time - let the legal system play out - and let the courts be the judge of your words on these lists.

I?m sure at the very least it will be interesting to observe and to hear your explanations from at least 4 sections of emails I?ve just been reading - and hey - I will certainly be curious to see if the courts declare that you can throw mud at someone without any substantive proof in a public forum? might be an interesting precedent if they do

Andrew

Get Outlook for iOS<https://aka.ms/o0ukef>
________________________________
From: Noah <noah at neo.co.tz>
Sent: Tuesday, January 4, 2022 9:13:03 PM
To: Andrew Alston <Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com>
Cc: Boubakar Barry <boubakarbarry at gmail.com>; General Discussions of AFRINIC <community-discuss at afrinic.net>
Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] Fwd: DEFAMATION AGAINST MR. LU HENG :-/



On Tue, 4 Jan 2022, 20:39 Andrew Alston, <Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com<mailto:Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com>> wrote:
No - I?m suggesting people don?t defame others and break the law by making statements that fall into the category of libel or defamation -

You have to prove the defamation claims before a competent court if you were not aware.

and if they choose to do so - then they accept the consequences.

What consequences. Has there been a ruling in any competent court that someone was actually defamed?

Your escalated and exaggerated statements are misleading.


Calling someone a criminal in a public forum without any charges having been filed or proven - is defamatory.  It?s pretty simple really - just - don?t do it

Dont attempt to spread lies Andrew.

Who called who a criminal?

Can you prove your false statement above by providing evidence of the same?

Noah
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20220104/09c6d958/attachment.html>

From amelnaud at gmail.com  Tue Jan  4 20:13:13 2022
From: amelnaud at gmail.com (Arnaud AMELINA)
Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2022 20:13:13 +0000
Subject: [Community-Discuss] Fwd: DEFAMATION AGAINST MR. LU HENG :-/
In-Reply-To: <AM7PR03MB645198DDB50BE7BAF6256DFFEE4A9@AM7PR03MB6451.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
References: <CAEqgTWZJGoZJRrwu=miGL0z63rBzxEA7Q+NepwnAS6XGH7NdOA@mail.gmail.com>
 <AM7PR03MB64518A46B25E70559984BE69EE4A9@AM7PR03MB6451.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
 <CAGrBSSh=CXjkJ+-5AUtC+e6kCOFSeLudJKSqJUDmPJte_OqNkg@mail.gmail.com>
 <AM7PR03MB6451B4BF11F0572C45959465EE4A9@AM7PR03MB6451.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
 <CAEqgTWau86Uypah7yibGx8RoO3X=b9JzB-JVrA8Ei8Y=-VDM=A@mail.gmail.com>
 <AM7PR03MB645198DDB50BE7BAF6256DFFEE4A9@AM7PR03MB6451.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
Message-ID: <CAGDMR_cXj2b7TDVJ=pJRrR2d=G=qgrEJhLU+PvZHRSeYdZcKKg@mail.gmail.com>

Cher Andrew, j'ignorais que tu es devenu avocat de Lu, f?licitations. Bien
maintenant que tu sembles diffam? Noah en pr?tendant qu'il aurait trait?
quelqu'un de "Criminel" sans preuve. Peut-il lui aussi t'est? en justice ?

Soyons raisonnable et laissons chacun d?fendre son cas. Et vos tentatives
de fermer la bouche aux membres membres de la communaut?, ouvrira la mienne
et je ne ferai pas de cadeau ? qui que se soit qui le m?rite.

Noah tu as le soutien de la communaut? enti?re, s'il le faut on cotisera
pour payer tes avocats comme on l'a fait pour soutenir AFRINIC. Ce qui fait
notre force est notre solidarit?, ? part quelques brebis galeuses qui
soutiennent les pourfendeurs de l'Afrique.

Nouvelle signature des messages.
--
"*je ne diffame personne*" lol

Arnaud

Le mar. 4 janv. 2022 ? 19:51, Andrew Alston via Community-Discuss <
community-discuss at afrinic.net> a ?crit :

> Noah - I won?t entertain this thread any further because it?s not worth my
> time - let the legal system play out - and let the courts be the judge of
> your words on these lists.
>
> I?m sure at the very least it will be interesting to observe and to hear
> your explanations from at least 4 sections of emails I?ve just been reading
> - and hey - I will certainly be curious to see if the courts declare that
> you can throw mud at someone without any substantive proof in a public
> forum? might be an interesting precedent if they do
>
> Andrew
>
> Get Outlook for iOS <https://aka.ms/o0ukef>
> ------------------------------
> *From:* Noah <noah at neo.co.tz>
> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 4, 2022 9:13:03 PM
> *To:* Andrew Alston <Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com>
> *Cc:* Boubakar Barry <boubakarbarry at gmail.com>; General Discussions of
> AFRINIC <community-discuss at afrinic.net>
> *Subject:* Re: [Community-Discuss] Fwd: DEFAMATION AGAINST MR. LU HENG :-/
>
>
>
> On Tue, 4 Jan 2022, 20:39 Andrew Alston, <Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com>
> wrote:
>
> No - I?m suggesting people don?t defame others and break the law by making
> statements that fall into the category of libel or defamation -
>
>
> You have to prove the defamation claims before a competent court if you
> were not aware.
>
> and if they choose to do so - then they accept the consequences.
>
>
> What consequences. Has there been a ruling in any competent court that
> someone was actually defamed?
>
> Your escalated and exaggerated statements are misleading.
>
>
> Calling someone a criminal in a public forum without any charges having
> been filed or proven - is defamatory.  It?s pretty simple really - just -
> don?t do it
>
>
> Dont attempt to spread lies Andrew.
>
> Who called who a criminal?
>
> Can you prove your false statement above by providing evidence of the same?
>
> Noah
> _______________________________________________
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20220104/d95243f6/attachment.html>

From owen at delong.com  Fri Jan  7 17:09:12 2022
From: owen at delong.com (Owen DeLong)
Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2022 09:09:12 -0800
Subject: [Community-Discuss] [arin-ppml] Update on Litigation Between
 AFRINIC and Cloud Innovation ltd
In-Reply-To: <CAD4W+iMKF95S7BAxkL0jVKFF8rmjh_Ye9Xp+iv4oAfFZB0NTtg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <376CFB71-28F1-461F-9FB1-8A2E3FA8A7E8@arin.net>
 <28FB5496-419A-41E4-9A08-72895BB4A26A@delong.com>
 <CAD4W+iMKF95S7BAxkL0jVKFF8rmjh_Ye9Xp+iv4oAfFZB0NTtg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <5AA923C5-AC39-4EA9-AAA0-DA4C07971498@delong.com>



> On Dec 30, 2021, at 02:14 , DANIEL NANGHAKA <dndannang at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> I wonder why some members can't let the court of law do its work.
> 
> AFRINIC has provided updates to the community where necessity of the update is important. 

Several of which have contained false or misleading claims and most of which have been quite incomplete.

> If CI is to do there press releases, there is no problem as it is also noted that they should present facts and not mislead the community. 

I think you mean ?their press releases?.

Again, I am questioning the claim that what CI has presented is not factual or is misleading? IF someone actually wants to make
such a claim, then let them say exactly what the believe to be false or misleading and offer evidence to refute it. So far, that has
not happened.

> CI's press release looks vague and does not give detailed information. If you do a press release then present the exact issues otherwise just shut up and let the courts do there job. 

AFRINIC?s press releases have been similarly vague and have not offered detailed information. This is the nature of the limits
of what you can say when involved in litigation to some extent. Beyond that, of course both parties will attempt to convey themselves
in the best light as they attempt to gain ground in public opinion.

While I do some consulting for Cloud Innovation, I am not Cloud Innovation and I speak my own mind. I am as likely to criticize
Cloud Innovation as Praise it. When I believe AFRINIC has done something right, I will say so. When I believe AFRINIC is
violating its own policies and ignoring its own rules, I will say so.

Your criticism of the vagueness of press releases may be legitimate, but if so then it applies equally to both sides.

However, the press releases around these cases have been no more or less vague than virtually any other similar dispute
throughout history and this is generally true of both sides.

Owen

> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Wed, Dec 29, 2021, 23:08 Owen DeLong via Community-Discuss <community-discuss at afrinic.net <mailto:community-discuss at afrinic.net>> wrote:
> Are you saying that the cloud innovation press release contains false, misleading, or inaccurate defamatory claims about afrinic?
> 
> Owen
> 
> 
>> On Dec 28, 2021, at 12:38, John Curran <jcurran at arin.net <mailto:jcurran at arin.net>> wrote:
>> 
>> ? 
>>> On 28 Dec 2021, at 2:49 PM, Mathanya Ramaboea <mathanyawork at gmail.com <mailto:mathanyawork at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> I highly appreciate CI's good communication with its clients regarding the development of the lawsuit but I also agree that it would be good to see what AFRINIC also has to say on the matter, to its members and everyone else in the community. It is normal that the case involves a certain level of confidentiality but from Cheken's link it appears that AFRINIC has "repeatedly breached the Judge's order and acted in contempt of the court'', so at what cost? How would this reflect on the outcome of the litigation and everyone impacted?
>> 
>> Reference:  https://afrinic.net/court-cases <https://afrinic.net/court-cases>
>> 
>> Given that one of the matters of litigation is a claim of defamation by Cloud Innovation against AFRINIC as a result of AFRINIC?s past communications to the community about the cases, it would not surprise me in the least if AFRINIC were to be quite reticent about further communications on these legal matters ? I know that I would be if ARIN faced similar circumstances, even if it went further so as to include specious representations to our community about their status.
>> 
>> FYI,
>> /John
>> 
>> John Curran
>> President and CEO
>> American Registry for Internet Numbers
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Community-Discuss mailing list
>> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net <mailto:Community-Discuss at afrinic.net>
>> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss <https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss>
> _______________________________________________
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net <mailto:Community-Discuss at afrinic.net>
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss <https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20220107/15b7fc2c/attachment.html>

From owen at delong.com  Sat Jan  8 00:48:15 2022
From: owen at delong.com (Owen DeLong)
Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2022 16:48:15 -0800
Subject: [Community-Discuss] [arin-ppml] Update on Litigation Between
	AFRINIC and Cloud Innovation ltd
In-Reply-To: <5AA923C5-AC39-4EA9-AAA0-DA4C07971498@delong.com>
References: <5AA923C5-AC39-4EA9-AAA0-DA4C07971498@delong.com>
Message-ID: <18889C05-26B2-49AD-B723-B0BAD76B1120@delong.com>

Each of them is described in a case in Mauritian court. Feel free to pull the cases. They should not be hard to find. 

Owen


> On Jan 7, 2022, at 09:10, Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com> wrote:
> 
> ?
> 
>>> On Dec 30, 2021, at 02:14 , DANIEL NANGHAKA <dndannang at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> I wonder why some members can't let the court of law do its work.
>>> 
>>> AFRINIC has provided updates to the community where necessity of the update is important. 
>> 
>> Several of which have contained false or misleading claims and most of which have been quite incomplete.
>> 
>> If CI is to do there press releases, there is no problem as it is also noted that they should present facts and not mislead the community. 
> 
> I think you mean ?their press releases?.
> 
> Again, I am questioning the claim that what CI has presented is not factual or is misleading? IF someone actually wants to make
> such a claim, then let them say exactly what the believe to be false or misleading and offer evidence to refute it. So far, that has
> not happened.
> 
>> CI's press release looks vague and does not give detailed information. If you do a press release then present the exact issues otherwise just shut up and let the courts do there job. 
> 
> AFRINIC?s press releases have been similarly vague and have not offered detailed information. This is the nature of the limits
> of what you can say when involved in litigation to some extent. Beyond that, of course both parties will attempt to convey themselves
> in the best light as they attempt to gain ground in public opinion.
> 
> While I do some consulting for Cloud Innovation, I am not Cloud Innovation and I speak my own mind. I am as likely to criticize
> Cloud Innovation as Praise it. When I believe AFRINIC has done something right, I will say so. When I believe AFRINIC is
> violating its own policies and ignoring its own rules, I will say so.
> 
> Your criticism of the vagueness of press releases may be legitimate, but if so then it applies equally to both sides.
> 
> However, the press releases around these cases have been no more or less vague than virtually any other similar dispute
> throughout history and this is generally true of both sides.
> 
> Owen
> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> On Wed, Dec 29, 2021, 23:08 Owen DeLong via Community-Discuss <community-discuss at afrinic.net> wrote:
>>> Are you saying that the cloud innovation press release contains false, misleading, or inaccurate defamatory claims about afrinic?
>>> 
>>> Owen
>>> 
>>> 
>>>>> On Dec 28, 2021, at 12:38, John Curran <jcurran at arin.net> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>> ? 
>>>>> On 28 Dec 2021, at 2:49 PM, Mathanya Ramaboea <mathanyawork at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> I highly appreciate CI's good communication with its clients regarding the development of the lawsuit but I also agree that it would be good to see what AFRINIC also has to say on the matter, to its members and everyone else in the community. It is normal that the case involves a certain level of confidentiality but from Cheken's link it appears that AFRINIC has "repeatedly breached the Judge's order and acted in contempt of the court'', so at what cost? How would this reflect on the outcome of the litigation and everyone impacted?
>>>> 
>>>> Reference:  https://afrinic.net/court-cases
>>>> 
>>>> Given that one of the matters of litigation is a claim of defamation by Cloud Innovation against AFRINIC as a result of AFRINIC?s past communications to the community about the cases, it would not surprise me in the least if AFRINIC were to be quite reticent about further communications on these legal matters ? I know that I would be if ARIN faced similar circumstances, even if it went further so as to include specious representations to our community about their status.
>>>> 
>>>> FYI,
>>>> /John
>>>> 
>>>> John Curran
>>>> President and CEO
>>>> American Registry for Internet Numbers
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Community-Discuss mailing list
>>>> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
>>>> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Community-Discuss mailing list
>>> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
>>> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
> 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20220107/59ab2550/attachment.html>

From mark at tinka.africa  Mon Jan 10 13:23:32 2022
From: mark at tinka.africa (Mark Tinka)
Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2022 15:23:32 +0200
Subject: [Community-Discuss] Fwd: [APRICOT-PC-Chairs] APRICOT 2022 Call
	for Presentations
In-Reply-To: <0cc7c979-7cdd-cfab-4101-54be7bd3a28e@tinka.africa>
References: <7992a3ae-b930-7686-a646-796c65cb26f4@apricot.net>
 <0cc7c979-7cdd-cfab-4101-54be7bd3a28e@tinka.africa>
Message-ID: <718c5372-94e1-99ad-f9f7-04af54330e6a@tinka.africa>

Hi all.

Just a gentle reminder that the deadline for submissions is 31st 
January, which is in 21 days from now.

Due to the APRICOT PC reviewing papers on a first-come, first-served 
basis, most grateful if you can submit your talks sooner rather than later.

For more details on the submission and agenda milestones, please see:

https://2022.apricot.net/program/call-for-papers/

Mark.

On 11/16/21 06:30, Mark Tinka wrote:
> FYI.
>
> Mark.
>
> -------- Forwarded Message --------
> Subject: 	[APRICOT-PC-Chairs] APRICOT 2022 Call for Presentations
> Date: 	Thu, 7 Oct 2021 21:16:43 +1000
> From: 	Philip Smith <philip at apricot.net>
> Reply-To: 	APRICOT PC Chairs <pc-chairs at apricot.net>
> Organization: 	Asia Pacific Regional Conference on Operational 
> Technologies
> To: 	apops at apops.net
> CC: 	APRICOT PC Chairs <pc-chairs at apricot.net>
>
>
>
> Hi everyone,
>
> Please find below the call for presentations for APRICOT 2022! :-)
>
> Best wishes,
>
> philip
> --
>
> APRICOT 2022
> 21st February - 3rd March, Online
> https://2022.apricot.net
>
> CALL FOR PRESENTATIONS
> ======================
>
> The APRICOT 2022 Programme Committee is now seeking contributions for
> Presentations and Tutorials for the APRICOT 2022 Conference.
>
> We are looking for presenters who would:
>
> - Offer a technical tutorial on an appropriate topic;
> - Participate in the technical conference sessions as a speaker;
> - Convene and chair panel sessions of relevant topics;
>
> Please submit on-line at:
>
> http://papers.apricot.net/user/login.php?event=142
>
> Tutorials will take place during the week of 21st February.
> Conference sessions and the Peering Forum will take place on the week
> of 28th February. All APRICOT 2022 session times will be one hour
> long, with up to four sessions scheduled per day.
>
> CONFERENCE MILESTONES
> ---------------------
>
> Call for Papers Opens: Now
> Initial Draft Programme: 6th December 2021
> Final Deadline for Submissions: 31st January 2022
> Final Program Published: 7th February 2022
> Final Slides Received: 14th February 2022
>
> *SLOTS ARE FILLED ON A FIRST COME, FIRST SERVED BASIS, REGARDLESS OF
> PUBLISHED DEADLINES*
>
> PROGRAMME CONTENT
> -----------------
>
> The APRICOT Conference Programme consists of three parts, these being
> Tutorials, the Peering Forum, and Conference Sessions.
>
> Topics proposed must be relevant to Internet Operations and Technologies:
>
> - IPv4 / IPv6 Routing and Operations
> - Internet backbone operations
> - Routing Security, including RPKI and MANRS
> - Peering, Interconnects and IXPs
> - Network Function Virtualisaton
> - Network Automation/Programming
> - Content Distribution Network technology & operations
> - Research on Internet Operations and Deployment
> - Network infrastructure security
> - IPv6 deployment on fixed and Wireless/Cellular networks
> - DNS / DNSSEC
> - Access and Transport Technologies
> - Content & Service Delivery and "Cloud Computing"
>
>
> PEERING FORUM
> -------------
>
> Due to APRICOT 2022 being held online, the PC will only accept Peering
> Personals prior to the event starting. Submissions must be of a
> single slide listing the operator's PeeringDB entry. Please refer to
> https://tinyurl.com/y46954n5 for how to create a successful Peering
> Personal presentation.
>
>
> CfP SUBMISSION
> --------------
>
> Draft slides for both tutorials and conference sessions MUST be
> provided with CfP submissions otherwise the submission will be
> rejected immediately. For work in progress, the most current
> information available at time of submission is acceptable.
>
> All draft and complete slides must be submitted in PDF format only.
> Slides must be of original work, preferably not presented before at
> other venues, with all company confidential marks removed.
>
> Final slides are to be provided by the specified deadline for
> publication on the APRICOT website.
>
> Prospective presenters should note that the majority of speaking slots
> will be filled well before the final submission deadline. The PC may,
> at their discretion, retain a limited number of slots up to the final
> submission deadline for presentations that are exceptionally timely,
> important, or of critical operational importance. Every year we turn
> away submissions, due to filling up all available programme slots
> before the deadline. Presenters should endeavour to get material to
> the PC sooner rather than later.
>
> For any questions or concerns, please email the PC Chairs.
>
> We look forward to receiving your presentation proposals.
>
> Mark Tinka, Tugsorshikh Badarch & Marijana Novakovic
> Co-Chairs, APRICOT 2022 Programme Committee
> --
>
> -- 
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email topc-chairs+unsubscribe at apricot.net.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20220110/00de33b5/attachment.html>

From rfg at tristatelogic.com  Mon Jan 10 18:18:27 2022
From: rfg at tristatelogic.com (Ronald F. Guilmette)
Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2022 10:18:27 -0800
Subject: [Community-Discuss] Fwd: DEFAMATION AGAINST MR. LU HENG :-/
In-Reply-To: <CAEqgTWZJGoZJRrwu=miGL0z63rBzxEA7Q+NepwnAS6XGH7NdOA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <58965.1641838707@segfault.tristatelogic.com>

In message <CAEqgTWZJGoZJRrwu=miGL0z63rBzxEA7Q+NepwnAS6XGH7NdOA at mail.gmail.com>, 
Noah <noah at neo.co.tz> wrote:

>So while enjoying the festive holidays, I got served with a seize and
>desist by counsels of you know who? Well email read "Le Heng" who I suppose
>they meant, Lu Heng.

https://c.tenor.com/yqW-Dh4nevUAAAAM/queenofhearts-redqueen.gif

:-)




From rfg at tristatelogic.com  Mon Jan 10 18:29:48 2022
From: rfg at tristatelogic.com (Ronald F. Guilmette)
Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2022 10:29:48 -0800
Subject: [Community-Discuss] Fwd: DEFAMATION AGAINST MR. LU HENG :-/
In-Reply-To: <AM7PR03MB64518A46B25E70559984BE69EE4A9@AM7PR03MB6451.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
Message-ID: <59064.1641839388@segfault.tristatelogic.com>

In message <AM7PR03MB64518A46B25E70559984BE69EE4A9 at AM7PR03MB6451.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>, 
Andrew Alston <Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com> wrote:

>Firstly generally not a good idea to air such things on a public mailing list
>that's just common sense.

I respectfully disagree.

The community and the people need to know if some certain specific parties are
using and/or possibly abusing the legal systems in various countries as a blunt
instrument to suppress any and all discussion of their real or imagined moral
failings, especially when any such failings may have, or may be having a direct
effect upon the community.

As one of our revered former Supreme Court justices here in the U.S. once famously
said "Sunshine is the best disinfectant."


Regards,
rfg



From rfg at tristatelogic.com  Mon Jan 10 18:38:20 2022
From: rfg at tristatelogic.com (Ronald F. Guilmette)
Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2022 10:38:20 -0800
Subject: [Community-Discuss] DEFAMATION AGAINST MR. LU HENG :-/
In-Reply-To: <E49D7651-411C-4B68-8777-3B75DF064BC7@wia.co.tz>
Message-ID: <59143.1641839900@segfault.tristatelogic.com>

In message <E49D7651-411C-4B68-8777-3B75DF064BC7 at wia.co.tz>, 
Murungi Daniel <dmurungi at wia.co.tz> wrote:

>This is an attempt to silence a member and sow fear within the community.

I would just like to remind everyone that Cloud Innovation and/or Mr. Lu
Heng (I'm not really sure which) are allegedly *already* suing both the
AFRINIC CEO and the AFRINIC Board Chairman for defamation.

Although Noah has (allegedly) been -threatened- with defamation litigation,
actual defamation litigation is *already* ongoing against your CEO & Board
Chairman.

I do not mean to make light of Noah's outrage.  My only point here is that
people should keep in mind the full context, and that we are *not* currently
discussing a mere isolated incident.


Regards,
rfg



From rfg at tristatelogic.com  Mon Jan 10 19:03:23 2022
From: rfg at tristatelogic.com (Ronald F. Guilmette)
Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2022 11:03:23 -0800
Subject: [Community-Discuss] sock puppets (was: Re: Fwd: DEFAMATION AGAINST
	MR. LU HENG :-/)
In-Reply-To: <CAO3CAMpPySJfm=z-wf39eVLkK7rcOKSno3TgtsMQ074L23i9bQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <59337.1641841403@segfault.tristatelogic.com>

In message <CAO3CAMpPySJfm=z-wf39eVLkK7rcOKSno3TgtsMQ074L23i9bQ at mail.gmail.com>, 
Siyuan Miao <siyuan at misaka.io> wrote:

>Dear community,
>
>It might be off-topic but should we only allow people with company email to
>discuss here?
>
>There are always mysterious people with gmail.com email addresses
>supporting Larus / Cloud Innovation and you can't even find any other
>records when you Google their name or email address.

If asked, I would vote "no" on that proposal.

People using gmail accounts is not the problem.  The problem is *anonymous*
fake people using gmail accounts.

Nobody using any kind of "freemail" email address should be allowed to post
unless and until they have persuasively established their bona fides, i.e.
who they are, that they are real people, and that they have some CLEARLY
ARTICULATABLE basis for having an interest in matters pertaining to AFRINIC.

I would propose that -any- participant on -any- AFRINIC mailing list should
be permitted to send a private email to postmaster at afrinic.net which calls
into question the legitimacy of any other single participant on any AFRINIC
mailing list, and that postmaster at afrinic.net would then be obliged to make
appropriate inquiries regarding the reality/legitimacy of that other mailing
list participant, up to and including requiring a copy of that other participant's
passport (with photo) or other government-issued identification document, as
well as a clear and persuasive statement of the basis for that participant's
interest in AFRINIC-related matters.

In lieu of such reasonable bona fides, the participant's email address would
be blocked (by postmaster at afrinic.net) from making further list posts.

This is not heavy-handed censorship.  This is merely common sense mailing list
moderation and administration, and I, for one, am frankly appalled by the fact
that whoever is supposed to be administering the mailing lists for AFRINIC has
not already and unilaterally undertaken these obviously necessary steps to
maintain order.

I mean this has gotten totally out of hand already some time ago.  And AFRINIC's
response to this self-evident problem... or, more accurately, its lack of
response... is nothing short of blind denialism.

Will we have to wait until this mailing list is overrun with spammers selling
bogus cryptocurrency schemes before postmaster at afrinic.net takes the situation
in hand and at long last does his/her job?


Regards,
rfg



From Omo.Oaiya at wacren.net  Mon Jan 10 19:23:35 2022
From: Omo.Oaiya at wacren.net (Omo Oaiya)
Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2022 19:23:35 +0000
Subject: [Community-Discuss] sock puppets (was: Re: Fwd: DEFAMATION
 AGAINST MR. LU HENG :-/)
In-Reply-To: <59337.1641841403@segfault.tristatelogic.com>
References: <CAO3CAMpPySJfm=z-wf39eVLkK7rcOKSno3TgtsMQ074L23i9bQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <59337.1641841403@segfault.tristatelogic.com>
Message-ID: <CAG1eoi2YNxXJbwvpQUzsv1O0h+T-dRiZEa8zc2v5e_MP6Uq30w@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, 10 Jan 2022 at 19:05, Ronald F. Guilmette <rfg at tristatelogic.com>
wrote:

>
> I would propose that -any- participant on -any- AFRINIC mailing list should
> be permitted to send a private email to postmaster at afrinic.net which calls
> into question the legitimacy of any other single participant on any AFRINIC
> mailing list, and that postmaster at afrinic.net would then be obliged to
> make
> appropriate inquiries regarding the reality/legitimacy of that other
> mailing
> list participant, up to and including requiring a copy of that other
> participant's
> passport (with photo) or other government-issued identification document,
> as
> well as a clear and persuasive statement of the basis for that
> participant's
> interest in AFRINIC-related matters.
>
> In lieu of such reasonable bona fides, the participant's email address
> would
> be blocked (by postmaster at afrinic.net) from making further list posts.
>
> This is not heavy-handed censorship.  This is merely common sense mailing
> list
> moderation and administration, and I, for one, am frankly appalled by the
> fact
> that whoever is supposed to be administering the mailing lists for AFRINIC
> has
> not already and unilaterally undertaken these obviously necessary steps to
> maintain order.
>

I support this practical approach.  It has become pointless to respond to
email threads overtaken by faceless minions.

Omo
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20220110/6b0a2b2a/attachment.html>

From noah at neo.co.tz  Mon Jan 10 19:54:03 2022
From: noah at neo.co.tz (Noah)
Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2022 22:54:03 +0300
Subject: [Community-Discuss] Fwd: DEFAMATION AGAINST MR. LU HENG :-/
In-Reply-To: <58965.1641838707@segfault.tristatelogic.com>
References: <CAEqgTWZJGoZJRrwu=miGL0z63rBzxEA7Q+NepwnAS6XGH7NdOA@mail.gmail.com>
 <58965.1641838707@segfault.tristatelogic.com>
Message-ID: <CAEqgTWZ8grcqPZ95q5xLcXUJs07vTU-SwNvrHWBRcMJGZGSE_A@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, 10 Jan 2022, 21:24 Ronald F. Guilmette, <rfg at tristatelogic.com>
wrote:

> In message <CAEqgTWZJGoZJRrwu=
> miGL0z63rBzxEA7Q+NepwnAS6XGH7NdOA at mail.gmail.com>,
> Noah <noah at neo.co.tz> wrote:
>
> >So while enjoying the festive holidays, I got served with a seize and
> >desist by counsels of you know who? Well email read "Le Heng" who I
> suppose
> >they meant, Lu Heng.
>
> https://c.tenor.com/yqW-Dh4nevUAAAAM/queenofhearts-redqueen.gif
>
> :-)
>


Lol.... I know right ????

Noah


>
> _______________________________________________
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20220110/a2a21e79/attachment.html>

From rfg at tristatelogic.com  Mon Jan 10 20:06:03 2022
From: rfg at tristatelogic.com (Ronald F. Guilmette)
Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2022 12:06:03 -0800
Subject: [Community-Discuss] Fwd: DEFAMATION AGAINST MR. LU HENG :-/
In-Reply-To: <AM7PR03MB6451B4BF11F0572C45959465EE4A9@AM7PR03MB6451.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
Message-ID: <59762.1641845163@segfault.tristatelogic.com>

In message <AM7PR03MB6451B4BF11F0572C45959465EE4A9 at AM7PR03MB6451.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>, 
Andrew Alston <Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com> wrote:

>Calling someone a criminal in a public forum without any charges having been
>filed or proven - is defamatory.  It's pretty simple really - just - do't do it

Although I myself have used that exact word here with reference to certain
parties, I have done so only in cases where I believe that facts & evidence
are abundant and irrefutable, even in the absence of formal charges having
(yet) been filed.

That having been said, I would generally agree with Andrew's advice here.  For
cases where the facts and evidence may perhaps be refutable, I prefer the term
"crook", which is subject to various interpretations and which thus might be
classified, in a legal context, as a statement of opinion, rather than as a
statement of fact.  (And that fine distinction is of great importance in most
jurisdictions and in the context of defamation litigation.)


Regards,
rfg



From ali at hussein.me.ke  Tue Jan 11 09:05:15 2022
From: ali at hussein.me.ke (Ali Hussein)
Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2022 12:05:15 +0300
Subject: [Community-Discuss] Fwd: DEFAMATION AGAINST MR. LU HENG :-/
In-Reply-To: <59762.1641845163@segfault.tristatelogic.com>
References: <AM7PR03MB6451B4BF11F0572C45959465EE4A9@AM7PR03MB6451.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
 <59762.1641845163@segfault.tristatelogic.com>
Message-ID: <CAPjmBy2mFcVEuG2VQAZCtvXBAqRRNWRJ0qXJYhRHaPjb9s4aVQ@mail.gmail.com>

In every village (virtual or real) there are those:-

1. Who are called madmen because they invariably speak the unpalatable
truth that the majority may not want to hear and the minority elite will do
all it can to shut down.
2. Those that intimidate through strength and wealth.
3. Those who are spectators and watch with amusement or dismay depending on
which side they silently support.

Such is the nature of communities. Life goes on!

Happy 2022 you all!

Regards

*Ali Hussein*

Fintech | Digital Transformation


Tel: +254 713 601113

Twitter: @AliHKassim

Skype: abu-jomo

LinkedIn: http://ke.linkedin.com/in/alihkassim
<http://ke.linkedin.com/in/alihkassim>




Any information of a personal nature expressed in this email are purely
mine and do not necessarily reflect the official positions of the
organizations that I work with.


On Mon, Jan 10, 2022 at 11:07 PM Ronald F. Guilmette <rfg at tristatelogic.com>
wrote:

> In message <
> AM7PR03MB6451B4BF11F0572C45959465EE4A9 at AM7PR03MB6451.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>,
>
> Andrew Alston <Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com> wrote:
>
> >Calling someone a criminal in a public forum without any charges having
> been
> >filed or proven - is defamatory.  It's pretty simple really - just - do't
> do it
>
> Although I myself have used that exact word here with reference to certain
> parties, I have done so only in cases where I believe that facts & evidence
> are abundant and irrefutable, even in the absence of formal charges having
> (yet) been filed.
>
> That having been said, I would generally agree with Andrew's advice here.
> For
> cases where the facts and evidence may perhaps be refutable, I prefer the
> term
> "crook", which is subject to various interpretations and which thus might
> be
> classified, in a legal context, as a statement of opinion, rather than as a
> statement of fact.  (And that fine distinction is of great importance in
> most
> jurisdictions and in the context of defamation litigation.)
>
>
> Regards,
> rfg
>
> _______________________________________________
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20220111/25a1dc1e/attachment.html>

From jason.larus at gmail.com  Wed Jan 12 03:06:47 2022
From: jason.larus at gmail.com (Jason Larus Limited)
Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2022 11:06:47 +0800
Subject: [Community-Discuss] To post to this list
Message-ID: <CAESbn2AyWG1YAb0cvNt9cButq8ovm1DUxsNB+bDa3yFJ1_HORw@mail.gmail.com>

lacnog at lacnic.net
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20220112/d913051b/attachment.html>

From rfg at tristatelogic.com  Thu Jan 13 03:35:57 2022
From: rfg at tristatelogic.com (Ronald F. Guilmette)
Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2022 19:35:57 -0800
Subject: [Community-Discuss] Interesting Times of Israel article
Message-ID: <86277.1642044957@segfault.tristatelogic.com>

Somebody sent me this link to a recent intresting article in the Times
of Israel and I just thought that i would share it...

https://www.timesofisrael.com/with-criminals-moving-online-fraud-now-israels-top-illicit-cash-crop/

Stay safe out there friends!


Regards,
rfg



From comms at afrinic.net  Thu Jan 20 12:49:12 2022
From: comms at afrinic.net (AFRINIC Communication)
Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2022 16:49:12 +0400
Subject: [Community-Discuss] ID verification on the Database Working Group
	mailing list
Message-ID: <21DA9CE4-4A38-4852-B50A-C4C1F9208D9D@afrinic.net>

Dear colleagues,

AFRINIC is now introducing  an ID verification process for our mailing lists. This is part of our ?Know Your Customer? (KYC) measures that aims at addressing any abuses on the AFRINIC community mailing lists and making our online community a place where people can better engage and learn from and with their peers.

The ID verification will start its application with the Database Working Group mailing list and will follow a simple process, before embarking on the other AFRINIC community mailing lists. Thank you for your constructive feedback as we seek to continue improving the process.

You are kindly invited to start the process by filling out this form: https://verification.afrinic.net/ <https://verification.afrinic.net/>

Subscribers to this mailing list have until the 20th of February 2022 to complete their ID verification.

We encourage all subscribers to take necessary steps before the above timeframe has elapsed.

Kindly note that after the 20th of February 2022, the messages of the subscribers who have not completed the KYC check will be automatically rejected.

Regards,
AFRINIC Team

??????????????????..

Chers coll?gues,

AFRINIC introduit un processus de v?rification d'identit? pour nos listes de diffusion. Ceci fait partie de nos mesures "Know Your Customer" (KYC) qui visent ? traiter tout abus sur les listes de diffusion de la communaut? AFRINIC et ? faire de notre communaut? en ligne un lieu o? les gens peuvent mieux s'engager et apprendre de et avec leurs coll?gues.

La v?rification d'identit? commencera par la liste de diffusion du Groupe de travail sur les bases de donn?es (DBWG) et suivra un processus simple, avant de s'?tendre aux autres listes de diffusion de la communaut? AFRINIC. Nous vous remercions de vos commentaires constructifs, car nous cherchons ? continuer ? am?liorer le processus.

Vous ?tes cordialement invit?s ? commencer le processus en remplissant ce formulaire : https://verification.afrinic.net/ <https://verification.afrinic.net/>.
Les abonn?s ? cette liste de diffusion ont jusqu'au 20 f?vrier 2022 pour proc?der ? la v?rification de leur identit?.

Nous encourageons tous les abonn?s ? prendre les mesures n?cessaires avant que le d?lai ci-dessus ne soit ?coul?. 

Veuillez noter qu'apr?s le 20 f?vrier 2022, les messages des abonn?s qui n'auront pas effectu? la v?rification KYC seront automatiquement rejet?s.

Cordialement,
L'?quipe AFRINIC
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20220120/d02c1d73/attachment.html>

From owen at delong.com  Thu Jan 20 18:46:36 2022
From: owen at delong.com (Owen DeLong)
Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2022 10:46:36 -0800
Subject: [Community-Discuss] ID verification on the Database Working
	Group mailing list
In-Reply-To: <21DA9CE4-4A38-4852-B50A-C4C1F9208D9D@afrinic.net>
References: <21DA9CE4-4A38-4852-B50A-C4C1F9208D9D@afrinic.net>
Message-ID: <3B0A2103-5FAA-4079-A82E-4B226FED0862@delong.com>

The requirements are expressed in sexist terms. Arguably a violation of the very CoC it alleges to bind one to strict adherence. 

Perhaps this should be reviewed and amended?

Owen


> On Jan 20, 2022, at 04:52, AFRINIC Communication <comms at afrinic.net> wrote:
> 
> ?Dear colleagues,
> 
> AFRINIC is now introducing  an ID verification process for our mailing lists. This is part of our ?Know Your Customer? (KYC) measures that aims at addressing any abuses on the AFRINIC community mailing lists and making our online community a place where people can better engage and learn from and with their peers.
> 
> The ID verification will start its application with the Database Working Group mailing list and will follow a simple process, before embarking on the other AFRINIC community mailing lists. Thank you for your constructive feedback as we seek to continue improving the process.
> 
> You are kindly invited to start the process by filling out this form: https://verification.afrinic.net/
> 
> Subscribers to this mailing list have until the 20th of February 2022 to complete their ID verification.
> 
> We encourage all subscribers to take necessary steps before the above timeframe has elapsed.
> 
> Kindly note that after the 20th of February 2022, the messages of the subscribers who have not completed the KYC check will be automatically rejected.
> 
> Regards,
> AFRINIC Team
> 
> ??????????????????..
> 
> Chers coll?gues,
> 
> AFRINIC introduit un processus de v?rification d'identit? pour nos listes de diffusion. Ceci fait partie de nos mesures "Know Your Customer" (KYC) qui visent ? traiter tout abus sur les listes de diffusion de la communaut? AFRINIC et ? faire de notre communaut? en ligne un lieu o? les gens peuvent mieux s'engager et apprendre de et avec leurs coll?gues.
> 
> La v?rification d'identit? commencera par la liste de diffusion du Groupe de travail sur les bases de donn?es (DBWG) et suivra un processus simple, avant de s'?tendre aux autres listes de diffusion de la communaut? AFRINIC. Nous vous remercions de vos commentaires constructifs, car nous cherchons ? continuer ? am?liorer le processus.
> 
> Vous ?tes cordialement invit?s ? commencer le processus en remplissant ce formulaire : https://verification.afrinic.net/.
> Les abonn?s ? cette liste de diffusion ont jusqu'au 20 f?vrier 2022 pour proc?der ? la v?rification de leur identit?.
> 
> Nous encourageons tous les abonn?s ? prendre les mesures n?cessaires avant que le d?lai ci-dessus ne soit ?coul?. 
> 
> Veuillez noter qu'apr?s le 20 f?vrier 2022, les messages des abonn?s qui n'auront pas effectu? la v?rification KYC seront automatiquement rejet?s.
> 
> Cordialement,
> L'?quipe AFRINIC_______________________________________________
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20220120/48ee207a/attachment.html>

From owen at delong.com  Thu Jan 20 18:50:32 2022
From: owen at delong.com (Owen DeLong)
Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2022 10:50:32 -0800
Subject: [Community-Discuss] ID verification on the Database Working
	Group mailing list
In-Reply-To: <3B0A2103-5FAA-4079-A82E-4B226FED0862@delong.com>
References: <3B0A2103-5FAA-4079-A82E-4B226FED0862@delong.com>
Message-ID: <B308B4D0-6876-4616-AAB1-A691A457340E@delong.com>

The form requires one to agree to submit to an unspecified online identity verification process. This is not reasonable. The process should be spelled out in detail prior to demanding that someone agree to submit to it. 

While I favor a reasonable identity verification process, the document linked has no relationship to such a thing and is, instead a contract of attainder which should not be allowed. 

Owen
 

> On Jan 20, 2022, at 10:46, Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com> wrote:
> 
> ?
> The requirements are expressed in sexist terms. Arguably a violation of the very CoC it alleges to bind one to strict adherence. 
> 
> Perhaps this should be reviewed and amended?
> 
> Owen
> 
> 
>>> On Jan 20, 2022, at 04:52, AFRINIC Communication <comms at afrinic.net> wrote:
>>> 
>> ?Dear colleagues,
>> 
>> AFRINIC is now introducing  an ID verification process for our mailing lists. This is part of our ?Know Your Customer? (KYC) measures that aims at addressing any abuses on the AFRINIC community mailing lists and making our online community a place where people can better engage and learn from and with their peers.
>> 
>> The ID verification will start its application with the Database Working Group mailing list and will follow a simple process, before embarking on the other AFRINIC community mailing lists. Thank you for your constructive feedback as we seek to continue improving the process.
>> 
>> You are kindly invited to start the process by filling out this form: https://verification.afrinic.net/
>> 
>> Subscribers to this mailing list have until the 20th of February 2022 to complete their ID verification.
>> 
>> We encourage all subscribers to take necessary steps before the above timeframe has elapsed.
>> 
>> Kindly note that after the 20th of February 2022, the messages of the subscribers who have not completed the KYC check will be automatically rejected.
>> 
>> Regards,
>> AFRINIC Team
>> 
>> ??????????????????..
>> 
>> Chers coll?gues,
>> 
>> AFRINIC introduit un processus de v?rification d'identit? pour nos listes de diffusion. Ceci fait partie de nos mesures "Know Your Customer" (KYC) qui visent ? traiter tout abus sur les listes de diffusion de la communaut? AFRINIC et ? faire de notre communaut? en ligne un lieu o? les gens peuvent mieux s'engager et apprendre de et avec leurs coll?gues.
>> 
>> La v?rification d'identit? commencera par la liste de diffusion du Groupe de travail sur les bases de donn?es (DBWG) et suivra un processus simple, avant de s'?tendre aux autres listes de diffusion de la communaut? AFRINIC. Nous vous remercions de vos commentaires constructifs, car nous cherchons ? continuer ? am?liorer le processus.
>> 
>> Vous ?tes cordialement invit?s ? commencer le processus en remplissant ce formulaire : https://verification.afrinic.net/.
>> Les abonn?s ? cette liste de diffusion ont jusqu'au 20 f?vrier 2022 pour proc?der ? la v?rification de leur identit?.
>> 
>> Nous encourageons tous les abonn?s ? prendre les mesures n?cessaires avant que le d?lai ci-dessus ne soit ?coul?. 
>> 
>> Veuillez noter qu'apr?s le 20 f?vrier 2022, les messages des abonn?s qui n'auront pas effectu? la v?rification KYC seront automatiquement rejet?s.
>> 
>> Cordialement,
>> L'?quipe AFRINIC_______________________________________________
>> Community-Discuss mailing list
>> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
>> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20220120/acfb8d41/attachment.html>

From kstouray at yahoo.com  Thu Jan 20 21:55:38 2022
From: kstouray at yahoo.com (Katim S. Touray)
Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2022 21:55:38 +0000 (UTC)
Subject: [Community-Discuss] ID verification on the Database
	Working	Group mailing list
In-Reply-To: <B308B4D0-6876-4616-AAB1-A691A457340E@delong.com>
References: <3B0A2103-5FAA-4079-A82E-4B226FED0862@delong.com>
 <B308B4D0-6876-4616-AAB1-A691A457340E@delong.com>
Message-ID: <1726266441.277715.1642715738635@mail.yahoo.com>

Dear all,
I believe this is totally pointless and a ploy that's bound to fail. Besides, what would stop people from abandoning this and other AFRINIC lists to start new ones beyond AFRINIC's control? Come on!?
Katim?

Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android 
 
  On Thu, Jan 20, 2022 at 6:52 pm, Owen DeLong via Community-Discuss<community-discuss at afrinic.net> wrote:   _______________________________________________
Community-Discuss mailing list
Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20220120/df737025/attachment.html>

From Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com  Mon Jan 24 07:22:10 2022
From: Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com (Andrew Alston)
Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2022 07:22:10 +0000
Subject: [Community-Discuss] ID verification on the Database Working	Group
	mailing list
In-Reply-To: <AM7PR03MB64513B3A9823B5CD1FDD3D9BEE5E9@AM7PR03MB6451.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
References: <3B0A2103-5FAA-4079-A82E-4B226FED0862@delong.com>
 <B308B4D0-6876-4616-AAB1-A691A457340E@delong.com>
 <AM7PR03MB64513B3A9823B5CD1FDD3D9BEE5E9@AM7PR03MB6451.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
Message-ID: <AM7PR03MB645111558A560706935F735DEE5E9@AM7PR03MB6451.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>

If AfriNIC chooses to remove me from the lists because I refuse to hand over ID documents ? while they are quite ok with taking my money as an authorized admin contact ? then in effect, they are no longer providing the service that a full RIR providers to other members, based on a requirement that they have no mandate to implement.

AfriNIC cannot guarantee the security of information provided.
AfriNIC has no way to verify that the documents submitted are valid
AfriNIC has no mandate from its member base to request for and hold sensitive personal information.

To be blunt ? I will be giving AfriNIC no such documents ? if they choose to remove me from the lists and remove my say in this community and in their processes as a result ? either admit at that point that AfriNIC is no more than a book keeper to me ? and discount my fees accordingly ? or ? I will take whatever action I deem necessary to deal with what I view as a flagrant, unsanctioned move by an organization that is meant to be bottom up but has now just lost the plot.

I might point out that ? no other RIR has such a requirement.  Nor does the IETF.  What they do to solve the issues on their lists is they enforce a code of conduct, complete with an appeal process and a sergeant at arms who?s job it is to deal with violations of the code of conduct.  They sure as hell don?t ask for sensitive documents to prove who people are ? that?s insane.

Andrew



From: Owen DeLong via Community-Discuss <community-discuss at afrinic.net>
Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2022 9:51 PM
To: AFRINIC Communication <comms at afrinic.net>
Cc: Community Discuss <community-discuss at afrinic.net>
Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] ID verification on the Database Working Group mailing list

The form requires one to agree to submit to an unspecified online identity verification process. This is not reasonable. The process should be spelled out in detail prior to demanding that someone agree to submit to it.

While I favor a reasonable identity verification process, the document linked has no relationship to such a thing and is, instead a contract of attainder which should not be allowed.

Owen



On Jan 20, 2022, at 10:46, Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com<mailto:owen at delong.com>> wrote:
?
The requirements are expressed in sexist terms. Arguably a violation of the very CoC it alleges to bind one to strict adherence.

Perhaps this should be reviewed and amended?

Owen



On Jan 20, 2022, at 04:52, AFRINIC Communication <comms at afrinic.net<mailto:comms at afrinic.net>> wrote:
?Dear colleagues,

AFRINIC is now introducing  an ID verification process for our mailing lists. This is part of our ?Know Your Customer? (KYC) measures that aims at addressing any abuses on the AFRINIC community mailing lists and making our online community a place where people can better engage and learn from and with their peers.

The ID verification will start its application with the Database Working Group mailing list and will follow a simple process, before embarking on the other AFRINIC community mailing lists. Thank you for your constructive feedback as we seek to continue improving the process.

You are kindly invited to start the process by filling out this form: https://verification.afrinic.net/<https://verification.afrinic.net/>

Subscribers to this mailing list have until the 20th of February 2022 to complete their ID verification.

We encourage all subscribers to take necessary steps before the above timeframe has elapsed.

Kindly note that after the 20th of February 2022, the messages of the subscribers who have not completed the KYC check will be automatically rejected.

Regards,
AFRINIC Team

??????????????????..

Chers coll?gues,

AFRINIC introduit un processus de v?rification d'identit? pour nos listes de diffusion. Ceci fait partie de nos mesures "Know Your Customer" (KYC) qui visent ? traiter tout abus sur les listes de diffusion de la communaut? AFRINIC et ? faire de notre communaut? en ligne un lieu o? les gens peuvent mieux s'engager et apprendre de et avec leurs coll?gues.

La v?rification d'identit? commencera par la liste de diffusion du Groupe de travail sur les bases de donn?es (DBWG) et suivra un processus simple, avant de s'?tendre aux autres listes de diffusion de la communaut? AFRINIC. Nous vous remercions de vos commentaires constructifs, car nous cherchons ? continuer ? am?liorer le processus.

Vous ?tes cordialement invit?s ? commencer le processus en remplissant ce formulaire : https://verification.afrinic.net/<https://verification.afrinic.net/>.
Les abonn?s ? cette liste de diffusion ont jusqu'au 20 f?vrier 2022 pour proc?der ? la v?rification de leur identit?.

Nous encourageons tous les abonn?s ? prendre les mesures n?cessaires avant que le d?lai ci-dessus ne soit ?coul?.

Veuillez noter qu'apr?s le 20 f?vrier 2022, les messages des abonn?s qui n'auront pas effectu? la v?rification KYC seront automatiquement rejet?s.

Cordialement,
L'?quipe AFRINIC_______________________________________________
Community-Discuss mailing list
Community-Discuss at afrinic.net<mailto:Community-Discuss at afrinic.net>
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss<https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20220124/b36defa3/attachment.html>

From silber.mike at gmail.com  Mon Jan 24 08:43:51 2022
From: silber.mike at gmail.com (Mike Silber)
Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2022 10:43:51 +0200
Subject: [Community-Discuss] ID verification on the Database
 Working	Group mailing list
In-Reply-To: <AM7PR03MB645111558A560706935F735DEE5E9@AM7PR03MB6451.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
References: <3B0A2103-5FAA-4079-A82E-4B226FED0862@delong.com>
 <B308B4D0-6876-4616-AAB1-A691A457340E@delong.com>
 <AM7PR03MB64513B3A9823B5CD1FDD3D9BEE5E9@AM7PR03MB6451.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
 <AM7PR03MB645111558A560706935F735DEE5E9@AM7PR03MB6451.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
Message-ID: <D0CE4B21-BC7B-43C2-9510-A3C63BBC4B7B@gmail.com>

Andrew

You make some good points. Not sure if the IETF also has an issue with sock-puppets, astroturfing and posters using pseudonyms?Maybe you can enlighten us?

My personal view is that the key point that is missing [and the *real* issue on the mailing list] is not identity verification, but failure to disclose affiliation.

Along with the suggestions you made [code of conduct, well enforced] is a disclosure requirement [see ICANN?s SOI / statement of interest process for all working groups as an example].

I have no issue with comments from users using pseudonyms - provided they have a complete SOI setting out their affiliations to avoid the *real* concern with such users, namely sock-puppets and astroturfing.

Looking forward to your feedback.

Mike

> On 24 Jan 2022, at 09:22, Andrew Alston via Community-Discuss <community-discuss at afrinic.net> wrote:
> 
> If AfriNIC chooses to remove me from the lists because I refuse to hand over ID documents ? while they are quite ok with taking my money as an authorized admin contact ? then in effect, they are no longer providing the service that a full RIR providers to other members, based on a requirement that they have no mandate to implement.
>  
> AfriNIC cannot guarantee the security of information provided.
> AfriNIC has no way to verify that the documents submitted are valid
> AfriNIC has no mandate from its member base to request for and hold sensitive personal information.
>  
> To be blunt ? I will be giving AfriNIC no such documents ? if they choose to remove me from the lists and remove my say in this community and in their processes as a result ? either admit at that point that AfriNIC is no more than a book keeper to me ? and discount my fees accordingly ? or ? I will take whatever action I deem necessary to deal with what I view as a flagrant, unsanctioned move by an organization that is meant to be bottom up but has now just lost the plot.
>  
> I might point out that ? no other RIR has such a requirement.  Nor does the IETF.  What they do to solve the issues on their lists is they enforce a code of conduct, complete with an appeal process and a sergeant at arms who?s job it is to deal with violations of the code of conduct.  They sure as hell don?t ask for sensitive documents to prove who people are ? that?s insane.
>  
> Andrew
>  
>  
>  
> From: Owen DeLong via Community-Discuss <community-discuss at afrinic.net> 
> Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2022 9:51 PM
> To: AFRINIC Communication <comms at afrinic.net>
> Cc: Community Discuss <community-discuss at afrinic.net>
> Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] ID verification on the Database Working Group mailing list
>  
> The form requires one to agree to submit to an unspecified online identity verification process. This is not reasonable. The process should be spelled out in detail prior to demanding that someone agree to submit to it. 
>  
> While I favor a reasonable identity verification process, the document linked has no relationship to such a thing and is, instead a contract of attainder which should not be allowed. 
>  
> Owen
>  
> 
> 
> On Jan 20, 2022, at 10:46, Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com <mailto:owen at delong.com>> wrote:
> 
> ?
> The requirements are expressed in sexist terms. Arguably a violation of the very CoC it alleges to bind one to strict adherence. 
>  
> Perhaps this should be reviewed and amended?
>  
> Owen
>  
> 
> 
> On Jan 20, 2022, at 04:52, AFRINIC Communication <comms at afrinic.net <mailto:comms at afrinic.net>> wrote:
> 
> ?Dear colleagues,
> 
> AFRINIC is now introducing  an ID verification process for our mailing lists. This is part of our ?Know Your Customer? (KYC) measures that aims at addressing any abuses on the AFRINIC community mailing lists and making our online community a place where people can better engage and learn from and with their peers.
> 
> The ID verification will start its application with the Database Working Group mailing list and will follow a simple process, before embarking on the other AFRINIC community mailing lists. Thank you for your constructive feedback as we seek to continue improving the process.
> 
> You are kindly invited to start the process by filling out this form: https://verification.afrinic.net/ <https://verification.afrinic.net/>
> 
> Subscribers to this mailing list have until the 20th of February 2022 to complete their ID verification.
> 
> We encourage all subscribers to take necessary steps before the above timeframe has elapsed.
> 
> Kindly note that after the 20th of February 2022, the messages of the subscribers who have not completed the KYC check will be automatically rejected.
> 
> Regards,
> AFRINIC Team
> 
> ??????????????????..
> 
> Chers coll?gues,
> 
> AFRINIC introduit un processus de v?rification d'identit? pour nos listes de diffusion. Ceci fait partie de nos mesures "Know Your Customer" (KYC) qui visent ? traiter tout abus sur les listes de diffusion de la communaut? AFRINIC et ? faire de notre communaut? en ligne un lieu o? les gens peuvent mieux s'engager et apprendre de et avec leurs coll?gues.
> 
> La v?rification d'identit? commencera par la liste de diffusion du Groupe de travail sur les bases de donn?es (DBWG) et suivra un processus simple, avant de s'?tendre aux autres listes de diffusion de la communaut? AFRINIC. Nous vous remercions de vos commentaires constructifs, car nous cherchons ? continuer ? am?liorer le processus.
> 
> Vous ?tes cordialement invit?s ? commencer le processus en remplissant ce formulaire : https://verification.afrinic.net/ <https://verification.afrinic.net/>.
> Les abonn?s ? cette liste de diffusion ont jusqu'au 20 f?vrier 2022 pour proc?der ? la v?rification de leur identit?.
> 
> Nous encourageons tous les abonn?s ? prendre les mesures n?cessaires avant que le d?lai ci-dessus ne soit ?coul?. 
> 
> Veuillez noter qu'apr?s le 20 f?vrier 2022, les messages des abonn?s qui n'auront pas effectu? la v?rification KYC seront automatiquement rejet?s.
> 
> Cordialement,
> L'?quipe AFRINIC_______________________________________________
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net <mailto:Community-Discuss at afrinic.net>
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss <https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss>_______________________________________________
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20220124/e7a8a646/attachment.html>

From jordi.palet at consulintel.es  Mon Jan 24 09:13:13 2022
From: jordi.palet at consulintel.es (JORDI PALET MARTINEZ)
Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2022 10:13:13 +0100
Subject: [Community-Discuss] ID verification on the Database Working
 Group mailing list
In-Reply-To: <D0CE4B21-BC7B-43C2-9510-A3C63BBC4B7B@gmail.com>
References: <3B0A2103-5FAA-4079-A82E-4B226FED0862@delong.com>
 <B308B4D0-6876-4616-AAB1-A691A457340E@delong.com>
 <AM7PR03MB64513B3A9823B5CD1FDD3D9BEE5E9@AM7PR03MB6451.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
 <AM7PR03MB645111558A560706935F735DEE5E9@AM7PR03MB6451.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
 <D0CE4B21-BC7B-43C2-9510-A3C63BBC4B7B@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <ABC7BB0D-159E-40A2-B59B-B32B6A17CA45@consulintel.es>

That?s the point, we don?t have that problem in the IETF or any other RIR.

 

So, I think is fair that you look for solutions where you have problems or you may have them.

 

Anyway, I know that other RIRs are watching the verification process in AFRINIC so to implement also themselves, just as preventive measure, and I think it is very smart doing so.

 

 

Regards,

Jordi

@jordipalet

 

 

 

El 24/1/22 9:46, "Mike Silber" <silber.mike at gmail.com> escribi?:

 

Andrew

 

You make some good points. Not sure if the IETF also has an issue with sock-puppets, astroturfing and posters using pseudonyms?Maybe you can enlighten us?

 

My personal view is that the key point that is missing [and the *real* issue on the mailing list] is not identity verification, but failure to disclose affiliation.

 

Along with the suggestions you made [code of conduct, well enforced] is a disclosure requirement [see ICANN?s SOI / statement of interest process for all working groups as an example].

 

I have no issue with comments from users using pseudonyms - provided they have a complete SOI setting out their affiliations to avoid the *real* concern with such users, namely sock-puppets and astroturfing.

 

Looking forward to your feedback.

 

Mike



On 24 Jan 2022, at 09:22, Andrew Alston via Community-Discuss <community-discuss at afrinic.net> wrote:

 

If AfriNIC chooses to remove me from the lists because I refuse to hand over ID documents ? while they are quite ok with taking my money as an authorized admin contact ? then in effect, they are no longer providing the service that a full RIR providers to other members, based on a requirement that they have no mandate to implement.

 

AfriNIC cannot guarantee the security of information provided.

AfriNIC has no way to verify that the documents submitted are valid

AfriNIC has no mandate from its member base to request for and hold sensitive personal information.

 

To be blunt ? I will be giving AfriNIC no such documents ? if they choose to remove me from the lists and remove my say in this community and in their processes as a result ? either admit at that point that AfriNIC is no more than a book keeper to me ? and discount my fees accordingly ? or ? I will take whatever action I deem necessary to deal with what I view as a flagrant, unsanctioned move by an organization that is meant to be bottom up but has now just lost the plot.

 

I might point out that ? no other RIR has such a requirement.  Nor does the IETF.  What they do to solve the issues on their lists is they enforce a code of conduct, complete with an appeal process and a sergeant at arms who?s job it is to deal with violations of the code of conduct.  They sure as hell don?t ask for sensitive documents to prove who people are ? that?s insane.

 

Andrew

 

 

 

From: Owen DeLong via Community-Discuss <community-discuss at afrinic.net> 
Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2022 9:51 PM
To: AFRINIC Communication <comms at afrinic.net>
Cc: Community Discuss <community-discuss at afrinic.net>
Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] ID verification on the Database Working Group mailing list

 

The form requires one to agree to submit to an unspecified online identity verification process. This is not reasonable. The process should be spelled out in detail prior to demanding that someone agree to submit to it. 

 

While I favor a reasonable identity verification process, the document linked has no relationship to such a thing and is, instead a contract of attainder which should not be allowed. 

 

Owen

 

 

On Jan 20, 2022, at 10:46, Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com> wrote:

?

The requirements are expressed in sexist terms. Arguably a violation of the very CoC it alleges to bind one to strict adherence. 

 

Perhaps this should be reviewed and amended?

 

Owen

 

 

On Jan 20, 2022, at 04:52, AFRINIC Communication <comms at afrinic.net> wrote:

?Dear colleagues,

AFRINIC is now introducing  an ID verification process for our mailing lists. This is part of our ?Know Your Customer? (KYC) measures that aims at addressing any abuses on the AFRINIC community mailing lists and making our online community a place where people can better engage and learn from and with their peers.

The ID verification will start its application with the Database Working Group mailing list and will follow a simple process, before embarking on the other AFRINIC community mailing lists. Thank you for your constructive feedback as we seek to continue improving the process.

You are kindly invited to start the process by filling out this form: https://verification.afrinic.net/

Subscribers to this mailing list have until the 20th of February 2022 to complete their ID verification.

We encourage all subscribers to take necessary steps before the above timeframe has elapsed.

Kindly note that after the 20th of February 2022, the messages of the subscribers who have not completed the KYC check will be automatically rejected.

Regards,
AFRINIC Team

??????????????????..

Chers coll?gues,

AFRINIC introduit un processus de v?rification d'identit? pour nos listes de diffusion. Ceci fait partie de nos mesures "Know Your Customer" (KYC) qui visent ? traiter tout abus sur les listes de diffusion de la communaut? AFRINIC et ? faire de notre communaut? en ligne un lieu o? les gens peuvent mieux s'engager et apprendre de et avec leurs coll?gues.

La v?rification d'identit? commencera par la liste de diffusion du Groupe de travail sur les bases de donn?es (DBWG) et suivra un processus simple, avant de s'?tendre aux autres listes de diffusion de la communaut? AFRINIC. Nous vous remercions de vos commentaires constructifs, car nous cherchons ? continuer ? am?liorer le processus.

Vous ?tes cordialement invit?s ? commencer le processus en remplissant ce formulaire : https://verification.afrinic.net/.
Les abonn?s ? cette liste de diffusion ont jusqu'au 20 f?vrier 2022 pour proc?der ? la v?rification de leur identit?.

Nous encourageons tous les abonn?s ? prendre les mesures n?cessaires avant que le d?lai ci-dessus ne soit ?coul?. 

Veuillez noter qu'apr?s le 20 f?vrier 2022, les messages des abonn?s qui n'auront pas effectu? la v?rification KYC seront automatiquement rejet?s.

Cordialement,
L'?quipe AFRINIC_______________________________________________
Community-Discuss mailing list
Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss

_______________________________________________
Community-Discuss mailing list
Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss

 

_______________________________________________ Community-Discuss mailing list Community-Discuss at afrinic.net https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss 



**********************************************
IPv4 is over
Are you ready for the new Internet ?
http://www.theipv6company.com
The IPv6 Company

This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the exclusive use of the individual(s) named above and further non-explicilty authorized disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited and will be considered a criminal offense. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited, will be considered a criminal offense, so you must reply to the original sender to inform about this communication and delete it.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20220124/cccfa699/attachment.html>

From benm at workonline.africa  Mon Jan 24 09:35:11 2022
From: benm at workonline.africa (Ben Maddison)
Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2022 11:35:11 +0200
Subject: [Community-Discuss] ID verification on the Database Working
 Group mailing list
In-Reply-To: <D0CE4B21-BC7B-43C2-9510-A3C63BBC4B7B@gmail.com>
References: <3B0A2103-5FAA-4079-A82E-4B226FED0862@delong.com>
 <B308B4D0-6876-4616-AAB1-A691A457340E@delong.com>
 <AM7PR03MB64513B3A9823B5CD1FDD3D9BEE5E9@AM7PR03MB6451.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
 <AM7PR03MB645111558A560706935F735DEE5E9@AM7PR03MB6451.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
 <D0CE4B21-BC7B-43C2-9510-A3C63BBC4B7B@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20220124093511.6qyehd2wyibk7xfz@benm-laptop>

Hi Mike,

On 01/24, Mike Silber wrote:
> Andrew
> 
> You make some good points. Not sure if the IETF also has an issue with
> sock-puppets, astroturfing and posters using pseudonyms?Maybe you can
> enlighten us?
> 
> My personal view is that the key point that is missing [and the *real*
> issue on the mailing list] is not identity verification, but failure
> to disclose affiliation.
> 
> Along with the suggestions you made [code of conduct, well enforced]
> is a disclosure requirement [see ICANN?s SOI / statement of interest
> process for all working groups as an example].
> 
> I have no issue with comments from users using pseudonyms - provided
> they have a complete SOI setting out their affiliations to avoid the
> *real* concern with such users, namely sock-puppets and astroturfing.
> 
I think that we are conflating two separate problems.

If the WG chairs are doing their job, astroturfing *should* be a
non-issue. A valid argument ought to be taken as seriously whether it
comes from one individual or one-hundred.
The additional noise that it creates is certainly irritating, but then
so are flies.
We should collectively take a deep breath and ignore it.

The question of affiliation disclosure is, imo, more important.
I believe that the expectation on every list should be the same as at
the microphone at an in person meeting: identity yourself and state your
affiliation before you speak.

If a sender's affiliation is not obvious (From: domain, signature, etc),
then the chairs and/or moderators should challenge them to state it.
Failure[*] to do so should:
A)  be an indication to the community (and particularly for the purposes
    to considering consensus) that any arguments presented should be
    viewed with great skepticism; and
B)  be a CoC violation, eventually resulting in a ban.

In both cases, however, I think that the solution is for readers of the
list to to so critically, rather than for AFRINIC to become an identity
provider.
In any event, seeing someone's passport tells you nought about how their
rent gets paid.

[*]:
    I consider "private individual", "internet community member", "no
    hats", etc, to be bogus responses in this context.
    It may be important for individuals to make it clear that they are
    not speaking on behalf of their employer, but that should not exempt
    them from stating who their employer (etc) is.
    For example, I work for Workonline Communications (AS37271). The
    above is my personal opinion.

Cheers,

Ben
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20220124/c26e88b9/attachment.sig>

From silber.mike at gmail.com  Mon Jan 24 09:43:19 2022
From: silber.mike at gmail.com (Mike Silber)
Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2022 11:43:19 +0200
Subject: [Community-Discuss] ID verification on the Database Working
 Group mailing list
In-Reply-To: <20220124093511.6qyehd2wyibk7xfz@benm-laptop>
References: <3B0A2103-5FAA-4079-A82E-4B226FED0862@delong.com>
 <B308B4D0-6876-4616-AAB1-A691A457340E@delong.com>
 <AM7PR03MB64513B3A9823B5CD1FDD3D9BEE5E9@AM7PR03MB6451.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
 <AM7PR03MB645111558A560706935F735DEE5E9@AM7PR03MB6451.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
 <D0CE4B21-BC7B-43C2-9510-A3C63BBC4B7B@gmail.com>
 <20220124093511.6qyehd2wyibk7xfz@benm-laptop>
Message-ID: <5A7FC5B6-29D2-4D34-B3DB-5FE3D67BA9DF@gmail.com>

Thanks Ben

Some useful inputs and a few responses.

> On 24 Jan 2022, at 11:35, Ben Maddison <benm at workonline.africa> wrote:
> 
>> 
> I think that we are conflating two separate problems.

Valid comment.
> 
> If the WG chairs are doing their job, astroturfing *should* be a
> non-issue. A valid argument ought to be taken as seriously whether it
> comes from one individual or one-hundred.
> The additional noise that it creates is certainly irritating, but then
> so are flies.
> We should collectively take a deep breath and ignore it.

Noted and agreed.

> 
> The question of affiliation disclosure is, imo, more important.
> I believe that the expectation on every list should be the same as at
> the microphone at an in person meeting: identity yourself and state your
> affiliation before you speak.

Spot on!
> 
> If a sender's affiliation is not obvious (From: domain, signature, etc),
> then the chairs and/or moderators should challenge them to state it.
> Failure[*] to do so should:
> A)  be an indication to the community (and particularly for the purposes
>    to considering consensus) that any arguments presented should be
>    viewed with great skepticism; and
> B)  be a CoC violation, eventually resulting in a ban.

I accept your point - but think it would be better served on subscribing to the mailing list [or to retain your posting rights] rather than on a challenge basis. One post escapes the challenge and then there are claims of favouritism :-) 
> 
> In both cases, however, I think that the solution is for readers of the
> list to to so critically, rather than for AFRINIC to become an identity
> provider.
> In any event, seeing someone's passport tells you nought about how their
> rent gets paid.

Very valid points.
> 
> [*]:
>    I consider "private individual", "internet community member", "no
>    hats", etc, to be bogus responses in this context.
>    It may be important for individuals to make it clear that they are
>    not speaking on behalf of their employer, but that should not exempt
>    them from stating who their employer (etc) is.
>    For example, I work for Workonline Communications (AS37271). The
>    above is my personal opinion.
> 
Completely agree. I work for a member, however am not the member representative and hence prefer to use my personal address to distinguish myself from our official representative. It should be obvious from a quick search - but certainly no harm in calling it out specifically!

> Cheers,
> 
> Ben

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20220124/e573df74/attachment.html>

From benm at workonline.africa  Mon Jan 24 10:08:55 2022
From: benm at workonline.africa (Ben Maddison)
Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2022 12:08:55 +0200
Subject: [Community-Discuss] ID verification on the Database Working
 Group mailing list
In-Reply-To: <5A7FC5B6-29D2-4D34-B3DB-5FE3D67BA9DF@gmail.com>
References: <3B0A2103-5FAA-4079-A82E-4B226FED0862@delong.com>
 <B308B4D0-6876-4616-AAB1-A691A457340E@delong.com>
 <AM7PR03MB64513B3A9823B5CD1FDD3D9BEE5E9@AM7PR03MB6451.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
 <AM7PR03MB645111558A560706935F735DEE5E9@AM7PR03MB6451.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
 <D0CE4B21-BC7B-43C2-9510-A3C63BBC4B7B@gmail.com>
 <20220124093511.6qyehd2wyibk7xfz@benm-laptop>
 <5A7FC5B6-29D2-4D34-B3DB-5FE3D67BA9DF@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20220124100855.xbwtegwjawbznql5@benm-laptop>

Hi Mike,

On 01/24, Mike Silber wrote:
> [...]
> > On 24 Jan 2022, at 11:35, Ben Maddison <benm at workonline.africa> wrote:
> > 
> > [...]
> > 
> > If a sender's affiliation is not obvious (From: domain, signature, etc),
> > then the chairs and/or moderators should challenge them to state it.
> > Failure[*] to do so should:
> > A)  be an indication to the community (and particularly for the purposes
> >    to considering consensus) that any arguments presented should be
> >    viewed with great skepticism; and
> > B)  be a CoC violation, eventually resulting in a ban.
> 
> I accept your point - but think it would be better served on
> subscribing to the mailing list [or to retain your posting rights]
> rather than on a challenge basis. One post escapes the challenge and
> then there are claims of favouritism :-) 

Yup, that also seems a reasonable approach that I could support.

Assuming such a disclosure would be self asserted(?), that leaves some open
questions:

- How is that information provided to the reader of a message (perhaps
  auto inserting a link to a disclosure webpage at the foot of each
  message?)
- How is the provided information maintained to prevent staleness when,
  e.g. a subscriber changes job, accepts a new consulting gig, gets
  elected to a board somewhere?
- (Most stickily) to what extent is the provided disclosure verified,
  and by whom? This is hard enough in the case of positive assertions,
  and seems near-impossible in the case of omissions.
- Probably others...

Cheers,

Ben
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20220124/cfc0b7f3/attachment.sig>

From silber.mike at gmail.com  Mon Jan 24 10:39:07 2022
From: silber.mike at gmail.com (Mike Silber)
Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2022 12:39:07 +0200
Subject: [Community-Discuss] ID verification on the Database Working
 Group mailing list
In-Reply-To: <20220124100855.xbwtegwjawbznql5@benm-laptop>
References: <3B0A2103-5FAA-4079-A82E-4B226FED0862@delong.com>
 <B308B4D0-6876-4616-AAB1-A691A457340E@delong.com>
 <AM7PR03MB64513B3A9823B5CD1FDD3D9BEE5E9@AM7PR03MB6451.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
 <AM7PR03MB645111558A560706935F735DEE5E9@AM7PR03MB6451.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
 <D0CE4B21-BC7B-43C2-9510-A3C63BBC4B7B@gmail.com>
 <20220124093511.6qyehd2wyibk7xfz@benm-laptop>
 <5A7FC5B6-29D2-4D34-B3DB-5FE3D67BA9DF@gmail.com>
 <20220124100855.xbwtegwjawbznql5@benm-laptop>
Message-ID: <22CFABCB-A743-4F9C-90F7-99ED7E18A1F1@gmail.com>

Hi Ben

> On 24 Jan 2022, at 12:08, Ben Maddison <benm at workonline.africa> wrote:
> 
...
> Assuming such a disclosure would be self asserted(?), that leaves some open
> questions:
> 
> - How is that information provided to the reader of a message (perhaps
>  auto inserting a link to a disclosure webpage at the foot of each
>  message?)

I think simply having a live disclosure page would be sufficient. No need for inserting a link.

> - How is the provided information maintained to prevent staleness when,
>  e.g. a subscriber changes job, accepts a new consulting gig, gets
>  elected to a board somewhere?

In the ICANN world the expectation is an annual update, unless actual changes have occurred. WG group members generally are very responsible about updating. I suppose you can find a way to disable posting privileges if not updated every 12 months. Practical implementation is best left to staff.
 
> - (Most stickily) to what extent is the provided disclosure verified,
>  and by whom? This is hard enough in the case of positive assertions,
>  and seems near-impossible in the case of omissions.

Agreed - this is where your recommendation to the WG to ignore provocation from posters is useful, as well as guidance to the chairs to consider inputs more carefully when a clear SOI does not indicate a link between a poster?s affiliation and the assertions they make. For example - a poster making assertions about the difficulty of administering an abuse contact, yet the poster?s SOI does not incite any actual role in administering a network would signal that they may simply be a paid and undisclosed shill. They could be asked to update their SOI or have posting privileges removed.

> - Probably others...

No doubt 

> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Ben




From benm at workonline.africa  Mon Jan 24 10:57:19 2022
From: benm at workonline.africa (Ben Maddison)
Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2022 12:57:19 +0200
Subject: [Community-Discuss] ID verification on the Database Working
 Group mailing list
In-Reply-To: <22CFABCB-A743-4F9C-90F7-99ED7E18A1F1@gmail.com>
References: <3B0A2103-5FAA-4079-A82E-4B226FED0862@delong.com>
 <B308B4D0-6876-4616-AAB1-A691A457340E@delong.com>
 <AM7PR03MB64513B3A9823B5CD1FDD3D9BEE5E9@AM7PR03MB6451.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
 <AM7PR03MB645111558A560706935F735DEE5E9@AM7PR03MB6451.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
 <D0CE4B21-BC7B-43C2-9510-A3C63BBC4B7B@gmail.com>
 <20220124093511.6qyehd2wyibk7xfz@benm-laptop>
 <5A7FC5B6-29D2-4D34-B3DB-5FE3D67BA9DF@gmail.com>
 <20220124100855.xbwtegwjawbznql5@benm-laptop>
 <22CFABCB-A743-4F9C-90F7-99ED7E18A1F1@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20220124105719.si3o2uucntvzhzev@benm-laptop>

Hi Mike,

On 01/24, Mike Silber wrote:
> Hi Ben
> 
> > On 24 Jan 2022, at 12:08, Ben Maddison <benm at workonline.africa> wrote:
> > 
> ...
> > Assuming such a disclosure would be self asserted(?), that leaves some open
> > questions:
> > 
> > - How is that information provided to the reader of a message (perhaps
> >  auto inserting a link to a disclosure webpage at the foot of each
> >  message?)
> 
> I think simply having a live disclosure page would be sufficient. No
> need for inserting a link.
> 
As a reader, I would prefer to have a link to follow when curious about
the origin of a particular message, as opposed to going digging.
But implementation details...

> > - How is the provided information maintained to prevent staleness when,
> >  e.g. a subscriber changes job, accepts a new consulting gig, gets
> >  elected to a board somewhere?
> 
> In the ICANN world the expectation is an annual update, unless actual
> changes have occurred. WG group members generally are very responsible
> about updating. I suppose you can find a way to disable posting
> privileges if not updated every 12 months. Practical implementation is
> best left to staff.
>  
Sounds sane to me.

> > - (Most stickily) to what extent is the provided disclosure verified,
> >  and by whom? This is hard enough in the case of positive assertions,
> >  and seems near-impossible in the case of omissions.
> 
> Agreed - this is where your recommendation to the WG to ignore
> provocation from posters is useful, as well as guidance to the chairs
> to consider inputs more carefully when a clear SOI does not indicate a
> link between a poster?s affiliation and the assertions they make. For
> example - a poster making assertions about the difficulty of
> administering an abuse contact, yet the poster?s SOI does not incite
> any actual role in administering a network would signal that they may
> simply be a paid and undisclosed shill.

Yes, exactly the example I would have used :-)

> They could be asked to update their SOI or have posting privileges
> removed.
> 

This probably involves substantial additional work for someone. But
unfortunately unavoidable since we don't seem to be able to rely on good
faith at this point.

I think we are on the same page. Curious to hear what others have to
say.

Cheers,

Ben
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20220124/9068a3ac/attachment.sig>

From Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com  Mon Jan 24 11:13:25 2022
From: Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com (Andrew Alston)
Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2022 11:13:25 +0000
Subject: [Community-Discuss] ID verification on the Database
 Working	Group mailing list
In-Reply-To: <D0CE4B21-BC7B-43C2-9510-A3C63BBC4B7B@gmail.com>
References: <3B0A2103-5FAA-4079-A82E-4B226FED0862@delong.com>
 <B308B4D0-6876-4616-AAB1-A691A457340E@delong.com>
 <AM7PR03MB64513B3A9823B5CD1FDD3D9BEE5E9@AM7PR03MB6451.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
 <AM7PR03MB645111558A560706935F735DEE5E9@AM7PR03MB6451.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
 <D0CE4B21-BC7B-43C2-9510-A3C63BBC4B7B@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AM7PR03MB64513C1F875AEAF580C2B428EE5E9@AM7PR03MB6451.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>

Here is the thing Mike - do I know if the people in the ietf are sock puppets - no - do I care - no - and here is why.

If the code of conduct is written correctly - and properly enforced - it won?t make a difference - because consensus is not based on numbers of people - it is based on technical quality of objections - a single valid unaddressed objection can derail something and 500+1s aren?t gonna help.

If you step out of the code of conduct - the sergeant at arms doesn?t care who you are - he cares about what you say and the nature of your input.  Done right - the issue of sock puppets won?t be an issue. What will be at issue is - are you on topic - are you respectful - are following the note well (the rules that form the basis of the code of conduct)


Andrew

Get Outlook for iOS<https://aka.ms/o0ukef>
________________________________
From: Mike Silber <silber.mike at gmail.com>
Sent: Monday, January 24, 2022 11:43:51 AM
To: Andrew Alston <Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com>
Cc: General Discussions of AFRINIC <community-discuss at afrinic.net>
Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] ID verification on the Database Working Group mailing list

Andrew

You make some good points. Not sure if the IETF also has an issue with sock-puppets, astroturfing and posters using pseudonyms?Maybe you can enlighten us?

My personal view is that the key point that is missing [and the *real* issue on the mailing list] is not identity verification, but failure to disclose affiliation.

Along with the suggestions you made [code of conduct, well enforced] is a disclosure requirement [see ICANN?s SOI / statement of interest process for all working groups as an example].

I have no issue with comments from users using pseudonyms - provided they have a complete SOI setting out their affiliations to avoid the *real* concern with such users, namely sock-puppets and astroturfing.

Looking forward to your feedback.

Mike

On 24 Jan 2022, at 09:22, Andrew Alston via Community-Discuss <community-discuss at afrinic.net<mailto:community-discuss at afrinic.net>> wrote:

If AfriNIC chooses to remove me from the lists because I refuse to hand over ID documents ? while they are quite ok with taking my money as an authorized admin contact ? then in effect, they are no longer providing the service that a full RIR providers to other members, based on a requirement that they have no mandate to implement.



AfriNIC cannot guarantee the security of information provided.
AfriNIC has no way to verify that the documents submitted are valid
AfriNIC has no mandate from its member base to request for and hold sensitive personal information.



To be blunt ? I will be giving AfriNIC no such documents ? if they choose to remove me from the lists and remove my say in this community and in their processes as a result ? either admit at that point that AfriNIC is no more than a book keeper to me ? and discount my fees accordingly ? or ? I will take whatever action I deem necessary to deal with what I view as a flagrant, unsanctioned move by an organization that is meant to be bottom up but has now just lost the plot.



I might point out that ? no other RIR has such a requirement.  Nor does the IETF.  What they do to solve the issues on their lists is they enforce a code of conduct, complete with an appeal process and a sergeant at arms who?s job it is to deal with violations of the code of conduct.  They sure as hell don?t ask for sensitive documents to prove who people are ? that?s insane.



Andrew







From: Owen DeLong via Community-Discuss <community-discuss at afrinic.net<mailto:community-discuss at afrinic.net>>
Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2022 9:51 PM
To: AFRINIC Communication <comms at afrinic.net<mailto:comms at afrinic.net>>
Cc: Community Discuss <community-discuss at afrinic.net<mailto:community-discuss at afrinic.net>>
Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] ID verification on the Database Working Group mailing list



The form requires one to agree to submit to an unspecified online identity verification process. This is not reasonable. The process should be spelled out in detail prior to demanding that someone agree to submit to it.



While I favor a reasonable identity verification process, the document linked has no relationship to such a thing and is, instead a contract of attainder which should not be allowed.



Owen





On Jan 20, 2022, at 10:46, Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com<mailto:owen at delong.com>> wrote:

?
The requirements are expressed in sexist terms. Arguably a violation of the very CoC it alleges to bind one to strict adherence.



Perhaps this should be reviewed and amended?



Owen





On Jan 20, 2022, at 04:52, AFRINIC Communication <comms at afrinic.net<mailto:comms at afrinic.net>> wrote:

?Dear colleagues,

AFRINIC is now introducing  an ID verification process for our mailing lists. This is part of our ?Know Your Customer? (KYC) measures that aims at addressing any abuses on the AFRINIC community mailing lists and making our online community a place where people can better engage and learn from and with their peers.

The ID verification will start its application with the Database Working Group mailing list and will follow a simple process, before embarking on the other AFRINIC community mailing lists. Thank you for your constructive feedback as we seek to continue improving the process.

You are kindly invited to start the process by filling out this form: https://verification.afrinic.net/<https://verification.afrinic.net>

Subscribers to this mailing list have until the 20th of February 2022 to complete their ID verification.

We encourage all subscribers to take necessary steps before the above timeframe has elapsed.

Kindly note that after the 20th of February 2022, the messages of the subscribers who have not completed the KYC check will be automatically rejected.

Regards,
AFRINIC Team

??????????????????..

Chers coll?gues,

AFRINIC introduit un processus de v?rification d'identit? pour nos listes de diffusion. Ceci fait partie de nos mesures "Know Your Customer" (KYC) qui visent ? traiter tout abus sur les listes de diffusion de la communaut? AFRINIC et ? faire de notre communaut? en ligne un lieu o? les gens peuvent mieux s'engager et apprendre de et avec leurs coll?gues.

La v?rification d'identit? commencera par la liste de diffusion du Groupe de travail sur les bases de donn?es (DBWG) et suivra un processus simple, avant de s'?tendre aux autres listes de diffusion de la communaut? AFRINIC. Nous vous remercions de vos commentaires constructifs, car nous cherchons ? continuer ? am?liorer le processus.

Vous ?tes cordialement invit?s ? commencer le processus en remplissant ce formulaire : https://verification.afrinic.net/<https://verification.afrinic.net/>.
Les abonn?s ? cette liste de diffusion ont jusqu'au 20 f?vrier 2022 pour proc?der ? la v?rification de leur identit?.

Nous encourageons tous les abonn?s ? prendre les mesures n?cessaires avant que le d?lai ci-dessus ne soit ?coul?.

Veuillez noter qu'apr?s le 20 f?vrier 2022, les messages des abonn?s qui n'auront pas effectu? la v?rification KYC seront automatiquement rejet?s.

Cordialement,
L'?quipe AFRINIC_______________________________________________
Community-Discuss mailing list
Community-Discuss at afrinic.net<mailto:Community-Discuss at afrinic.net>
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss<https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss>
_______________________________________________
Community-Discuss mailing list
Community-Discuss at afrinic.net<mailto:Community-Discuss at afrinic.net>
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss<https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20220124/aa4d9f62/attachment.html>

From Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com  Mon Jan 24 11:18:32 2022
From: Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com (Andrew Alston)
Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2022 11:18:32 +0000
Subject: [Community-Discuss] ID verification on the Database Working
 Group mailing list
In-Reply-To: <20220124100855.xbwtegwjawbznql5@benm-laptop>
References: <3B0A2103-5FAA-4079-A82E-4B226FED0862@delong.com>
 <B308B4D0-6876-4616-AAB1-A691A457340E@delong.com>
 <AM7PR03MB64513B3A9823B5CD1FDD3D9BEE5E9@AM7PR03MB6451.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
 <AM7PR03MB645111558A560706935F735DEE5E9@AM7PR03MB6451.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
 <D0CE4B21-BC7B-43C2-9510-A3C63BBC4B7B@gmail.com>
 <20220124093511.6qyehd2wyibk7xfz@benm-laptop>
 <5A7FC5B6-29D2-4D34-B3DB-5FE3D67BA9DF@gmail.com>
 <20220124100855.xbwtegwjawbznql5@benm-laptop>
Message-ID: <AM7PR03MB6451D60FF59B2FDD02691E8FEE5E9@AM7PR03MB6451.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>

While affiliation is important - I think it?s relatively easy to solve - enforce a rule in the code of conduct that demands that posts contain either a statement of affiliation in the signature - or the company handle you are speaking on behalf of.

If you are speaking in private capacity - the signatures can still be there and a clear statement that you are speaking in private capacity.

This means the companies can deal with the offenders if they speak without authorization or if the signatures are fake.

Andrew


Get Outlook for iOS<https://aka.ms/o0ukef>

________________________________
From: Ben Maddison <benm at workonline.africa>
Sent: Monday, January 24, 2022 13:09
To: Mike Silber
Cc: Andrew Alston; General Discussions of AFRINIC
Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] ID verification on the Database Working Group mailing list

Hi Mike,

On 01/24, Mike Silber wrote:
> [...]
> > On 24 Jan 2022, at 11:35, Ben Maddison <benm at workonline.africa> wrote:
> >
> > [...]
> >
> > If a sender's affiliation is not obvious (From: domain, signature, etc),
> > then the chairs and/or moderators should challenge them to state it.
> > Failure[*] to do so should:
> > A)  be an indication to the community (and particularly for the purposes
> >    to considering consensus) that any arguments presented should be
> >    viewed with great skepticism; and
> > B)  be a CoC violation, eventually resulting in a ban.
>
> I accept your point - but think it would be better served on
> subscribing to the mailing list [or to retain your posting rights]
> rather than on a challenge basis. One post escapes the challenge and
> then there are claims of favouritism :-)

Yup, that also seems a reasonable approach that I could support.

Assuming such a disclosure would be self asserted(?), that leaves some open
questions:

- How is that information provided to the reader of a message (perhaps
  auto inserting a link to a disclosure webpage at the foot of each
  message?)
- How is the provided information maintained to prevent staleness when,
  e.g. a subscriber changes job, accepts a new consulting gig, gets
  elected to a board somewhere?
- (Most stickily) to what extent is the provided disclosure verified,
  and by whom? This is hard enough in the case of positive assertions,
  and seems near-impossible in the case of omissions.
- Probably others...

Cheers,

Ben
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20220124/21fcabc9/attachment.html>

From ubah.tonyiyke at gmail.com  Mon Jan 24 13:32:17 2022
From: ubah.tonyiyke at gmail.com (Anthony Ubah)
Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2022 08:32:17 -0500
Subject: [Community-Discuss] ID verification on the Database Working
 Group mailing list
In-Reply-To: <AM7PR03MB6451D60FF59B2FDD02691E8FEE5E9@AM7PR03MB6451.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
References: <3B0A2103-5FAA-4079-A82E-4B226FED0862@delong.com>
 <B308B4D0-6876-4616-AAB1-A691A457340E@delong.com>
 <AM7PR03MB64513B3A9823B5CD1FDD3D9BEE5E9@AM7PR03MB6451.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
 <AM7PR03MB645111558A560706935F735DEE5E9@AM7PR03MB6451.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
 <D0CE4B21-BC7B-43C2-9510-A3C63BBC4B7B@gmail.com>
 <20220124093511.6qyehd2wyibk7xfz@benm-laptop>
 <5A7FC5B6-29D2-4D34-B3DB-5FE3D67BA9DF@gmail.com>
 <20220124100855.xbwtegwjawbznql5@benm-laptop>
 <AM7PR03MB6451D60FF59B2FDD02691E8FEE5E9@AM7PR03MB6451.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
Message-ID: <CAHcb0AQDw3GXcgKkivZGXAwDfNksAgnv68b=YeUOZPB0xWyYQw@mail.gmail.com>

Hi,

Permit me to barge in into this threesome to add that, while the use of
sock puppets and crowd mentality should be discouraged in the community,
there is absolutely nothing wrong with the use of pseudonyms, nor cache
affiliations, as opinions and affiliations might not always align. Both can
also be on a collision course.

Now that I have your attention, I'll like to buttress that.

If an organization has not granted rights to an individual to represent,
that member of staff has absolutely no right to state affiliation, use
official email domain, or even identify the organization's resources in
holding like AS number or IP ranges. Doing otherwise is illigal.

Still chiming off the reason above, the call for use of organizational
email/domain name is absurd. I've enjoyed a good laugh in the background
every time some community members call for 'void' on comments for "Gmail"
users as against common sense, on the premise of 'Gmail', and nothing more.
This is a very narrow-minded call for a dozen reasons;
One, being that, while some members own, or are co-founders of their
organizations, some spend a bulk of/their entire career in one, while
others are in constant movent across organizations and regions. Different
strokes for different folks.
Hence such marginalization is not well-thought-out, and baseless. For
continuity purposes, members should be allowed to use whatever email
address they please.
Also switching emails will also put long-standing community members at risk
of being disenfranchised in voting within the community, as a new email
might not fulfil the longevity clause introduced lately for eligibility to
vote in the PDGW voting processes.

That said, I personally have no issues with verifying my own identity (I
already have), but I shouldn't be compelled to state my affiliation as a
yardstick to gauge my comments.
According to Afrinic's guidelines on this mailing list, it is for *'anybody
who has an interest in the activities of AFRINIC working groups'*, and not
for open resource holders, or affiliates.


Don't take my word for it. A quick reference to the Afrinic website will
provide some input on this. (https://afrinic.net/email)

An excerpt;

"Most of these mailing lists are open to anybody who has an interest in the
> activities of AFRINIC working groups and provides space for people to share
> information for the benefit of the entire community.
> While AFRINIC encourages the use of these lists for a healthy, relevant
> debate and information sharing, we also advise all to ensure that
> the AFRINIC Community Code of Conduct is respected."


In conclusion, the agenda being pushed is against the principles of these
guidelines and is simply dancing at the edge of a legal cliff.


Best Regards,

Anthony Ubah
*Zero Affiliation*








On Mon, Jan 24, 2022, 6:19 AM Andrew Alston via Community-Discuss <
community-discuss at afrinic.net> wrote:

> While affiliation is important - I think it?s relatively easy to solve -
> enforce a rule in the code of conduct that demands that posts contain
> either a statement of affiliation in the signature - or the company handle
> you are speaking on behalf of.
>
> If you are speaking in private capacity - the signatures can still be
> there and a clear statement that you are speaking in private capacity.
>
> This means the companies can deal with the offenders if they speak without
> authorization or if the signatures are fake.
>
> Andrew
>
>
> Get Outlook for iOS <https://aka.ms/o0ukef>
>
> ------------------------------
> *From:* Ben Maddison <benm at workonline.africa>
> *Sent:* Monday, January 24, 2022 13:09
> *To:* Mike Silber
> *Cc:* Andrew Alston; General Discussions of AFRINIC
> *Subject:* Re: [Community-Discuss] ID verification on the Database
> Working Group mailing list
>
> Hi Mike,
>
> On 01/24, Mike Silber wrote:
> > [...]
> > > On 24 Jan 2022, at 11:35, Ben Maddison <benm at workonline.africa> wrote:
> > >
> > > [...]
> > >
> > > If a sender's affiliation is not obvious (From: domain, signature,
> etc),
> > > then the chairs and/or moderators should challenge them to state it.
> > > Failure[*] to do so should:
> > > A)  be an indication to the community (and particularly for the
> purposes
> > >    to considering consensus) that any arguments presented should be
> > >    viewed with great skepticism; and
> > > B)  be a CoC violation, eventually resulting in a ban.
> >
> > I accept your point - but think it would be better served on
> > subscribing to the mailing list [or to retain your posting rights]
> > rather than on a challenge basis. One post escapes the challenge and
> > then there are claims of favouritism :-)
>
> Yup, that also seems a reasonable approach that I could support.
>
> Assuming such a disclosure would be self asserted(?), that leaves some open
> questions:
>
> - How is that information provided to the reader of a message (perhaps
>   auto inserting a link to a disclosure webpage at the foot of each
>   message?)
> - How is the provided information maintained to prevent staleness when,
>   e.g. a subscriber changes job, accepts a new consulting gig, gets
>   elected to a board somewhere?
> - (Most stickily) to what extent is the provided disclosure verified,
>   and by whom? This is hard enough in the case of positive assertions,
>   and seems near-impossible in the case of omissions.
> - Probably others...
>
> Cheers,
>
> Ben
> _______________________________________________
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20220124/571d7717/attachment.html>

From Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com  Mon Jan 24 14:18:43 2022
From: Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com (Andrew Alston)
Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2022 14:18:43 +0000
Subject: [Community-Discuss] ID verification on the Database Working
 Group mailing list
In-Reply-To: <CAHcb0AQDw3GXcgKkivZGXAwDfNksAgnv68b=YeUOZPB0xWyYQw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <3B0A2103-5FAA-4079-A82E-4B226FED0862@delong.com>
 <B308B4D0-6876-4616-AAB1-A691A457340E@delong.com>
 <AM7PR03MB64513B3A9823B5CD1FDD3D9BEE5E9@AM7PR03MB6451.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
 <AM7PR03MB645111558A560706935F735DEE5E9@AM7PR03MB6451.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
 <D0CE4B21-BC7B-43C2-9510-A3C63BBC4B7B@gmail.com>
 <20220124093511.6qyehd2wyibk7xfz@benm-laptop>
 <5A7FC5B6-29D2-4D34-B3DB-5FE3D67BA9DF@gmail.com>
 <20220124100855.xbwtegwjawbznql5@benm-laptop>
 <AM7PR03MB6451D60FF59B2FDD02691E8FEE5E9@AM7PR03MB6451.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
 <CAHcb0AQDw3GXcgKkivZGXAwDfNksAgnv68b=YeUOZPB0xWyYQw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AM7PR03MB645156E3CA7FFA266EBD4241EE5E9@AM7PR03MB6451.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>

Let me be clear - the affiliation to me is actually neither hear nor there other than on the members list - where I believe that affiliation is absolutely critical.

The members list however is limited to members and anyone posting on there should be a member and should be speaking as such.

To be frank though as per my previous comments - what should matter on the lists is the content of the message not the identity of the sender.  The RIRs and the ietf etc - and anywhere that engages in the concept of consensus based decision making is meant to look at the content of the messages.

A single objection that is unaddressed (not necessarily resolved - but it has to be adequately addressed) is meant to act as a blocker.  Support by a million people is not a gauge of consensus - nor is the affiliation of the person indicating such.

For some reason though we all seem to have forgotten the principles of consensus as best defined in rfc 7282 which can be found at https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc7282

This has for years been the basis on which technical consensus is defined.

Andrew

Get Outlook for iOS<https://aka.ms/o0ukef>
________________________________
From: Anthony Ubah <ubah.tonyiyke at gmail.com>
Sent: Monday, January 24, 2022 4:32:17 PM
To: Andrew Alston <Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com>; Mike Silber <silber.mike at gmail.com>; Ben Maddison <benm at workonline.africa>; JORDI PALET MARTINEZ <jordi.palet at consulintel.es>
Cc: General Discussions of AFRINIC <community-discuss at afrinic.net>
Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] ID verification on the Database Working Group mailing list

Hi,

Permit me to barge in into this threesome to add that, while the use of sock puppets and crowd mentality should be discouraged in the community, there is absolutely nothing wrong with the use of pseudonyms, nor cache affiliations, as opinions and affiliations might not always align. Both can also be on a collision course.

Now that I have your attention, I'll like to buttress that.

If an organization has not granted rights to an individual to represent, that member of staff has absolutely no right to state affiliation, use official email domain, or even identify the organization's resources in holding like AS number or IP ranges. Doing otherwise is illigal.

Still chiming off the reason above, the call for use of organizational email/domain name is absurd. I've enjoyed a good laugh in the background every time some community members call for 'void' on comments for "Gmail" users as against common sense, on the premise of 'Gmail', and nothing more. This is a very narrow-minded call for a dozen reasons;
One, being that, while some members own, or are co-founders of their organizations, some spend a bulk of/their entire career in one, while others are in constant movent across organizations and regions. Different strokes for different folks.
Hence such marginalization is not well-thought-out, and baseless. For continuity purposes, members should be allowed to use whatever email address they please.
Also switching emails will also put long-standing community members at risk of being disenfranchised in voting within the community, as a new email might not fulfil the longevity clause introduced lately for eligibility to vote in the PDGW voting processes.

That said, I personally have no issues with verifying my own identity (I already have), but I shouldn't be compelled to state my affiliation as a yardstick to gauge my comments.
According to Afrinic's guidelines on this mailing list, it is for 'anybody who has an interest in the activities of AFRINIC working groups', and not for open resource holders, or affiliates.


Don't take my word for it. A quick reference to the Afrinic website will provide some input on this. (https://afrinic.net/email<https://afrinic.net/email>)

An excerpt;

"Most of these mailing lists are open to anybody who has an interest in the activities of AFRINIC working groups and provides space for people to share information for the benefit of the entire community.
While AFRINIC encourages the use of these lists for a healthy, relevant debate and information sharing, we also advise all to ensure that the AFRINIC Community Code of Conduct is respected."

In conclusion, the agenda being pushed is against the principles of these guidelines and is simply dancing at the edge of a legal cliff.


Best Regards,

Anthony Ubah
Zero Affiliation








On Mon, Jan 24, 2022, 6:19 AM Andrew Alston via Community-Discuss <community-discuss at afrinic.net<mailto:community-discuss at afrinic.net>> wrote:
While affiliation is important - I think it?s relatively easy to solve - enforce a rule in the code of conduct that demands that posts contain either a statement of affiliation in the signature - or the company handle you are speaking on behalf of.

If you are speaking in private capacity - the signatures can still be there and a clear statement that you are speaking in private capacity.

This means the companies can deal with the offenders if they speak without authorization or if the signatures are fake.

Andrew


Get Outlook for iOS<https://aka.ms/o0ukef>

________________________________
From: Ben Maddison <benm at workonline.africa>
Sent: Monday, January 24, 2022 13:09
To: Mike Silber
Cc: Andrew Alston; General Discussions of AFRINIC
Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] ID verification on the Database Working Group mailing list

Hi Mike,

On 01/24, Mike Silber wrote:
> [...]
> > On 24 Jan 2022, at 11:35, Ben Maddison <benm at workonline.africa> wrote:
> >
> > [...]
> >
> > If a sender's affiliation is not obvious (From: domain, signature, etc),
> > then the chairs and/or moderators should challenge them to state it.
> > Failure[*] to do so should:
> > A)  be an indication to the community (and particularly for the purposes
> >    to considering consensus) that any arguments presented should be
> >    viewed with great skepticism; and
> > B)  be a CoC violation, eventually resulting in a ban.
>
> I accept your point - but think it would be better served on
> subscribing to the mailing list [or to retain your posting rights]
> rather than on a challenge basis. One post escapes the challenge and
> then there are claims of favouritism :-)

Yup, that also seems a reasonable approach that I could support.

Assuming such a disclosure would be self asserted(?), that leaves some open
questions:

- How is that information provided to the reader of a message (perhaps
  auto inserting a link to a disclosure webpage at the foot of each
  message?)
- How is the provided information maintained to prevent staleness when,
  e.g. a subscriber changes job, accepts a new consulting gig, gets
  elected to a board somewhere?
- (Most stickily) to what extent is the provided disclosure verified,
  and by whom? This is hard enough in the case of positive assertions,
  and seems near-impossible in the case of omissions.
- Probably others...

Cheers,

Ben
_______________________________________________
Community-Discuss mailing list
Community-Discuss at afrinic.net<mailto:Community-Discuss at afrinic.net>
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss<https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20220124/e02bf8da/attachment.html>

From silber.mike at gmail.com  Mon Jan 24 14:52:47 2022
From: silber.mike at gmail.com (Mike Silber)
Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2022 16:52:47 +0200
Subject: [Community-Discuss] ID verification on the Database Working
 Group mailing list
In-Reply-To: <AM7PR03MB645156E3CA7FFA266EBD4241EE5E9@AM7PR03MB6451.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
References: <3B0A2103-5FAA-4079-A82E-4B226FED0862@delong.com>
 <B308B4D0-6876-4616-AAB1-A691A457340E@delong.com>
 <AM7PR03MB64513B3A9823B5CD1FDD3D9BEE5E9@AM7PR03MB6451.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
 <AM7PR03MB645111558A560706935F735DEE5E9@AM7PR03MB6451.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
 <D0CE4B21-BC7B-43C2-9510-A3C63BBC4B7B@gmail.com>
 <20220124093511.6qyehd2wyibk7xfz@benm-laptop>
 <5A7FC5B6-29D2-4D34-B3DB-5FE3D67BA9DF@gmail.com>
 <20220124100855.xbwtegwjawbznql5@benm-laptop>
 <AM7PR03MB6451D60FF59B2FDD02691E8FEE5E9@AM7PR03MB6451.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
 <CAHcb0AQDw3GXcgKkivZGXAwDfNksAgnv68b=YeUOZPB0xWyYQw@mail.gmail.com>
 <AM7PR03MB645156E3CA7FFA266EBD4241EE5E9@AM7PR03MB6451.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
Message-ID: <CF03A608-08C2-4B47-AF5E-62C61764120A@gmail.com>

My request is not disclosure of affiliation - but disclosure of *interest*. Affiliation is but one item.

In the world of a small community and face to face meetings, we got to know and understand each other.

I think we should try retain that situation of being able to know and understand each other.

An example here: https://community.icann.org/display/gnsosoi/New+SOIs <https://community.icann.org/display/gnsosoi/New+SOIs>

 

> On 24 Jan 2022, at 16:18, Andrew Alston <Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com> wrote:
> 
> Let me be clear - the affiliation to me is actually neither hear nor there other than on the members list - where I believe that affiliation is absolutely critical.
> 
> The members list however is limited to members and anyone posting on there should be a member and should be speaking as such.
> 
> To be frank though as per my previous comments - what should matter on the lists is the content of the message not the identity of the sender.  The RIRs and the ietf etc - and anywhere that engages in the concept of consensus based decision making is meant to look at the content of the messages.
> 
> A single objection that is unaddressed (not necessarily resolved - but it has to be adequately addressed) is meant to act as a blocker.  Support by a million people is not a gauge of consensus - nor is the affiliation of the person indicating such.
> 
> For some reason though we all seem to have forgotten the principles of consensus as best defined in rfc 7282 which can be found at https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc7282 <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc7282>
> 
> This has for years been the basis on which technical consensus is defined.
> 
> Andrew 
> 
> Get Outlook for iOS <https://aka.ms/o0ukef>
> From: Anthony Ubah <ubah.tonyiyke at gmail.com>
> Sent: Monday, January 24, 2022 4:32:17 PM
> To: Andrew Alston <Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com>; Mike Silber <silber.mike at gmail.com>; Ben Maddison <benm at workonline.africa>; JORDI PALET MARTINEZ <jordi.palet at consulintel.es>
> Cc: General Discussions of AFRINIC <community-discuss at afrinic.net>
> Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] ID verification on the Database Working Group mailing list
>  
> Hi,
> 
> Permit me to barge in into this threesome to add that, while the use of sock puppets and crowd mentality should be discouraged in the community, there is absolutely nothing wrong with the use of pseudonyms, nor cache affiliations, as opinions and affiliations might not always align. Both can also be on a collision course.
> 
> Now that I have your attention, I'll like to buttress that.
> 
> If an organization has not granted rights to an individual to represent, that member of staff has absolutely no right to state affiliation, use official email domain, or even identify the organization's resources in holding like AS number or IP ranges. Doing otherwise is illigal.
> 
> Still chiming off the reason above, the call for use of organizational email/domain name is absurd. I've enjoyed a good laugh in the background every time some community members call for 'void' on comments for "Gmail" users as against common sense, on the premise of 'Gmail', and nothing more. This is a very narrow-minded call for a dozen reasons; 
> One, being that, while some members own, or are co-founders of their organizations, some spend a bulk of/their entire career in one, while others are in constant movent across organizations and regions. Different strokes for different folks.
> Hence such marginalization is not well-thought-out, and baseless. For continuity purposes, members should be allowed to use whatever email address they please.
> Also switching emails will also put long-standing community members at risk of being disenfranchised in voting within the community, as a new email might not fulfil the longevity clause introduced lately for eligibility to vote in the PDGW voting processes.
> 
> That said, I personally have no issues with verifying my own identity (I already have), but I shouldn't be compelled to state my affiliation as a yardstick to gauge my comments. 
> According to Afrinic's guidelines on this mailing list, it is for 'anybody who has an interest in the activities of AFRINIC working groups', and not for open resource holders, or affiliates.
> 
> 
> Don't take my word for it. A quick reference to the Afrinic website will provide some input on this. (https://afrinic.net/email <https://afrinic.net/email>)
> 
> An excerpt;
> 
> "Most of these mailing lists are open to anybody who has an interest in the activities of AFRINIC working groups and provides space for people to share information for the benefit of the entire community.
> While AFRINIC encourages the use of these lists for a healthy, relevant debate and information sharing, we also advise all to ensure that the AFRINIC Community Code of Conduct is respected."
> 
> In conclusion, the agenda being pushed is against the principles of these guidelines and is simply dancing at the edge of a legal cliff.
> 
> 
> Best Regards,
> 
> Anthony Ubah
> Zero Affiliation
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Mon, Jan 24, 2022, 6:19 AM Andrew Alston via Community-Discuss <community-discuss at afrinic.net <mailto:community-discuss at afrinic.net>> wrote:
> While affiliation is important - I think it?s relatively easy to solve - enforce a rule in the code of conduct that demands that posts contain either a statement of affiliation in the signature - or the company handle you are speaking on behalf of.
> 
> If you are speaking in private capacity - the signatures can still be there and a clear statement that you are speaking in private capacity.
> 
> This means the companies can deal with the offenders if they speak without authorization or if the signatures are fake.
> 
> Andrew 
> 
> 
> Get Outlook for iOS <https://aka.ms/o0ukef>
>  
> From: Ben Maddison <benm at workonline.africa>
> Sent: Monday, January 24, 2022 13:09
> To: Mike Silber
> Cc: Andrew Alston; General Discussions of AFRINIC
> Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] ID verification on the Database Working Group mailing list
>  
> Hi Mike,
> 
> On 01/24, Mike Silber wrote:
> > [...]
> > > On 24 Jan 2022, at 11:35, Ben Maddison <benm at workonline.africa> wrote:
> > > 
> > > [...]
> > > 
> > > If a sender's affiliation is not obvious (From: domain, signature, etc),
> > > then the chairs and/or moderators should challenge them to state it.
> > > Failure[*] to do so should:
> > > A)  be an indication to the community (and particularly for the purposes
> > >    to considering consensus) that any arguments presented should be
> > >    viewed with great skepticism; and
> > > B)  be a CoC violation, eventually resulting in a ban.
> > 
> > I accept your point - but think it would be better served on
> > subscribing to the mailing list [or to retain your posting rights]
> > rather than on a challenge basis. One post escapes the challenge and
> > then there are claims of favouritism :-) 
> 
> Yup, that also seems a reasonable approach that I could support.
> 
> Assuming such a disclosure would be self asserted(?), that leaves some open
> questions:
> 
> - How is that information provided to the reader of a message (perhaps
>   auto inserting a link to a disclosure webpage at the foot of each
>   message?)
> - How is the provided information maintained to prevent staleness when,
>   e.g. a subscriber changes job, accepts a new consulting gig, gets
>   elected to a board somewhere?
> - (Most stickily) to what extent is the provided disclosure verified,
>   and by whom? This is hard enough in the case of positive assertions,
>   and seems near-impossible in the case of omissions.
> - Probably others...
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Ben
> _______________________________________________
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net <mailto:Community-Discuss at afrinic.net>
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss <https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20220124/22f0613b/attachment.html>

From pascosoft at gmail.com  Mon Jan 24 16:58:29 2022
From: pascosoft at gmail.com (Paschal Ochang)
Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2022 16:58:29 +0000
Subject: [Community-Discuss] ID verification on the Database Working
 Group mailing list
In-Reply-To: <CF03A608-08C2-4B47-AF5E-62C61764120A@gmail.com>
References: <3B0A2103-5FAA-4079-A82E-4B226FED0862@delong.com>
 <B308B4D0-6876-4616-AAB1-A691A457340E@delong.com>
 <AM7PR03MB64513B3A9823B5CD1FDD3D9BEE5E9@AM7PR03MB6451.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
 <AM7PR03MB645111558A560706935F735DEE5E9@AM7PR03MB6451.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
 <D0CE4B21-BC7B-43C2-9510-A3C63BBC4B7B@gmail.com>
 <20220124093511.6qyehd2wyibk7xfz@benm-laptop>
 <5A7FC5B6-29D2-4D34-B3DB-5FE3D67BA9DF@gmail.com>
 <20220124100855.xbwtegwjawbznql5@benm-laptop>
 <AM7PR03MB6451D60FF59B2FDD02691E8FEE5E9@AM7PR03MB6451.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
 <CAHcb0AQDw3GXcgKkivZGXAwDfNksAgnv68b=YeUOZPB0xWyYQw@mail.gmail.com>
 <AM7PR03MB645156E3CA7FFA266EBD4241EE5E9@AM7PR03MB6451.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
 <CF03A608-08C2-4B47-AF5E-62C61764120A@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAMU0wT7uE2sCtjkWBr1h6n9=z+gUaSYw7v24TtPV55tGmz+51A@mail.gmail.com>

While I agree with some of your suggestions, I do not agree that we need to
know each other to understand each other. I believe that the validity of my
arguments should be the main determinant factor  and not whether we have
met physically before.

On Mon, Jan 24, 2022 at 2:53 PM Mike Silber <silber.mike at gmail.com> wrote:

> My request is not disclosure of affiliation - but disclosure of
> *interest*. Affiliation is but one item.
>
> In the world of a small community and face to face meetings, we got to
> know and understand each other.
>
> I think we should try retain that situation of being able to know and
> understand each other.
>
> An example here: https://community.icann.org/display/gnsosoi/New+SOIs
>
>
>
> On 24 Jan 2022, at 16:18, Andrew Alston <Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com>
> wrote:
>
> Let me be clear - the affiliation to me is actually neither hear nor there
> other than on the members list - where I believe that affiliation is
> absolutely critical.
>
> The members list however is limited to members and anyone posting on there
> should be a member and should be speaking as such.
>
> To be frank though as per my previous comments - what should matter on the
> lists is the content of the message not the identity of the sender.  The
> RIRs and the ietf etc - and anywhere that engages in the concept of
> consensus based decision making is meant to look at the content of the
> messages.
>
> A single objection that is unaddressed (not necessarily resolved - but it
> has to be adequately addressed) is meant to act as a blocker.  Support by a
> million people is not a gauge of consensus - nor is the affiliation of the
> person indicating such.
>
> For some reason though we all seem to have forgotten the principles of
> consensus as best defined in rfc 7282 which can be found at
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc7282
>
> This has for years been the basis on which technical consensus is defined.
>
> Andrew
>
> Get Outlook for iOS <https://aka.ms/o0ukef>
> ------------------------------
> *From:* Anthony Ubah <ubah.tonyiyke at gmail.com>
> *Sent:* Monday, January 24, 2022 4:32:17 PM
> *To:* Andrew Alston <Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com>; Mike Silber <
> silber.mike at gmail.com>; Ben Maddison <benm at workonline.africa>; JORDI
> PALET MARTINEZ <jordi.palet at consulintel.es>
> *Cc:* General Discussions of AFRINIC <community-discuss at afrinic.net>
> *Subject:* Re: [Community-Discuss] ID verification on the Database
> Working Group mailing list
>
> Hi,
>
> Permit me to barge in into this threesome to add that, while the use of
> sock puppets and crowd mentality should be discouraged in the community,
> there is absolutely nothing wrong with the use of pseudonyms, nor cache
> affiliations, as opinions and affiliations might not always align. Both can
> also be on a collision course.
>
> Now that I have your attention, I'll like to buttress that.
>
> If an organization has not granted rights to an individual to represent,
> that member of staff has absolutely no right to state affiliation, use
> official email domain, or even identify the organization's resources in
> holding like AS number or IP ranges. Doing otherwise is illigal.
>
> Still chiming off the reason above, the call for use of organizational
> email/domain name is absurd. I've enjoyed a good laugh in the background
> every time some community members call for 'void' on comments for "Gmail"
> users as against common sense, on the premise of 'Gmail', and nothing more.
> This is a very narrow-minded call for a dozen reasons;
> One, being that, while some members own, or are co-founders of their
> organizations, some spend a bulk of/their entire career in one, while
> others are in constant movent across organizations and regions. Different
> strokes for different folks.
> Hence such marginalization is not well-thought-out, and baseless. For
> continuity purposes, members should be allowed to use whatever email
> address they please.
> Also switching emails will also put long-standing community members at
> risk of being disenfranchised in voting within the community, as a new
> email might not fulfil the longevity clause introduced lately for
> eligibility to vote in the PDGW voting processes.
>
> That said, I personally have no issues with verifying my own identity (I
> already have), but I shouldn't be compelled to state my affiliation as a
> yardstick to gauge my comments.
> According to Afrinic's guidelines on this mailing list, it is for *'anybody
> who has an interest in the activities of AFRINIC working groups'*, and
> not for open resource holders, or affiliates.
>
>
> Don't take my word for it. A quick reference to the Afrinic website will
> provide some input on this. (https://afrinic.net/email)
>
> An excerpt;
>
> "Most of these mailing lists are open to anybody who has an interest in
> the activities of AFRINIC working groups and provides space for people to
> share information for the benefit of the entire community.
> While AFRINIC encourages the use of these lists for a healthy, relevant
> debate and information sharing, we also advise all to ensure that
> the AFRINIC Community Code of Conduct is respected."
>
>
> In conclusion, the agenda being pushed is against the principles of these
> guidelines and is simply dancing at the edge of a legal cliff.
>
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Anthony Ubah
> *Zero Affiliation*
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Jan 24, 2022, 6:19 AM Andrew Alston via Community-Discuss <
> community-discuss at afrinic.net> wrote:
>
> While affiliation is important - I think it?s relatively easy to solve -
> enforce a rule in the code of conduct that demands that posts contain
> either a statement of affiliation in the signature - or the company handle
> you are speaking on behalf of.
>
> If you are speaking in private capacity - the signatures can still be
> there and a clear statement that you are speaking in private capacity.
>
> This means the companies can deal with the offenders if they speak without
> authorization or if the signatures are fake.
>
> Andrew
>
>
> Get Outlook for iOS <https://aka.ms/o0ukef>
>
> ------------------------------
> *From:* Ben Maddison <benm at workonline.africa>
> *Sent:* Monday, January 24, 2022 13:09
> *To:* Mike Silber
> *Cc:* Andrew Alston; General Discussions of AFRINIC
> *Subject:* Re: [Community-Discuss] ID verification on the Database
> Working Group mailing list
>
> Hi Mike,
>
> On 01/24, Mike Silber wrote:
> > [...]
> > > On 24 Jan 2022, at 11:35, Ben Maddison <benm at workonline.africa> wrote:
> > >
> > > [...]
> > >
> > > If a sender's affiliation is not obvious (From: domain, signature,
> etc),
> > > then the chairs and/or moderators should challenge them to state it.
> > > Failure[*] to do so should:
> > > A)  be an indication to the community (and particularly for the
> purposes
> > >    to considering consensus) that any arguments presented should be
> > >    viewed with great skepticism; and
> > > B)  be a CoC violation, eventually resulting in a ban.
> >
> > I accept your point - but think it would be better served on
> > subscribing to the mailing list [or to retain your posting rights]
> > rather than on a challenge basis. One post escapes the challenge and
> > then there are claims of favouritism :-)
>
> Yup, that also seems a reasonable approach that I could support.
>
> Assuming such a disclosure would be self asserted(?), that leaves some open
> questions:
>
> - How is that information provided to the reader of a message (perhaps
>   auto inserting a link to a disclosure webpage at the foot of each
>   message?)
> - How is the provided information maintained to prevent staleness when,
>   e.g. a subscriber changes job, accepts a new consulting gig, gets
>   elected to a board somewhere?
> - (Most stickily) to what extent is the provided disclosure verified,
>   and by whom? This is hard enough in the case of positive assertions,
>   and seems near-impossible in the case of omissions.
> - Probably others...
>
> Cheers,
>
> Ben
> _______________________________________________
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20220124/459c432d/attachment.html>

From sander at steffann.nl  Mon Jan 24 17:38:12 2022
From: sander at steffann.nl (Sander Steffann)
Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2022 18:38:12 +0100
Subject: [Community-Discuss] ID verification on the Database Working
 Group mailing list
In-Reply-To: <CAMU0wT7uE2sCtjkWBr1h6n9=z+gUaSYw7v24TtPV55tGmz+51A@mail.gmail.com>
References: <3B0A2103-5FAA-4079-A82E-4B226FED0862@delong.com>
 <B308B4D0-6876-4616-AAB1-A691A457340E@delong.com>
 <AM7PR03MB64513B3A9823B5CD1FDD3D9BEE5E9@AM7PR03MB6451.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
 <AM7PR03MB645111558A560706935F735DEE5E9@AM7PR03MB6451.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
 <D0CE4B21-BC7B-43C2-9510-A3C63BBC4B7B@gmail.com>
 <20220124093511.6qyehd2wyibk7xfz@benm-laptop>
 <5A7FC5B6-29D2-4D34-B3DB-5FE3D67BA9DF@gmail.com>
 <20220124100855.xbwtegwjawbznql5@benm-laptop>
 <AM7PR03MB6451D60FF59B2FDD02691E8FEE5E9@AM7PR03MB6451.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
 <CAHcb0AQDw3GXcgKkivZGXAwDfNksAgnv68b=YeUOZPB0xWyYQw@mail.gmail.com>
 <AM7PR03MB645156E3CA7FFA266EBD4241EE5E9@AM7PR03MB6451.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
 <CF03A608-08C2-4B47-AF5E-62C61764120A@gmail.com>
 <CAMU0wT7uE2sCtjkWBr1h6n9=z+gUaSYw7v24TtPV55tGmz+51A@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <3DF8F1E9-76CF-44D0-8515-37DCBAC106BE@steffann.nl>

Hi all.

There has been a lot of discussion about what is justified and necessary. I personally have no problem with showing my identity card to Afrinic, and have done so. It's not like my identity is a secret :)

My contact info is well documented in the RIPE database:

person:          Sander Steffann
org:             ORG-SSP3-RIPE
address:         SJM Steffann Automatisering
address:         Tienwoningenweg 46
address:         7312 DN Apeldoorn
address:         The Netherlands
phone:           +31 6 22660412
e-mail:          sander at steffann.nl
notify:          sander at steffann.nl
nic-hdl:         SJMS1-RIPE
mnt-by:          STEFFANN-MNT
created:         2005-10-20T08:23:25Z
last-modified:   2017-03-17T00:02:24Z
source:          RIPE

My birthday is the 16th of August, and I like single malt whisky ;)

Cheers,
Sander




From Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com  Mon Jan 24 21:25:51 2022
From: Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com (Andrew Alston)
Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2022 21:25:51 +0000
Subject: [Community-Discuss] ID verification on the Database Working
 Group mailing list
In-Reply-To: <3DF8F1E9-76CF-44D0-8515-37DCBAC106BE@steffann.nl>
References: <3B0A2103-5FAA-4079-A82E-4B226FED0862@delong.com>
 <B308B4D0-6876-4616-AAB1-A691A457340E@delong.com>
 <AM7PR03MB64513B3A9823B5CD1FDD3D9BEE5E9@AM7PR03MB6451.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
 <AM7PR03MB645111558A560706935F735DEE5E9@AM7PR03MB6451.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
 <D0CE4B21-BC7B-43C2-9510-A3C63BBC4B7B@gmail.com>
 <20220124093511.6qyehd2wyibk7xfz@benm-laptop>
 <5A7FC5B6-29D2-4D34-B3DB-5FE3D67BA9DF@gmail.com>
 <20220124100855.xbwtegwjawbznql5@benm-laptop>
 <AM7PR03MB6451D60FF59B2FDD02691E8FEE5E9@AM7PR03MB6451.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
 <CAHcb0AQDw3GXcgKkivZGXAwDfNksAgnv68b=YeUOZPB0xWyYQw@mail.gmail.com>
 <AM7PR03MB645156E3CA7FFA266EBD4241EE5E9@AM7PR03MB6451.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
 <CF03A608-08C2-4B47-AF5E-62C61764120A@gmail.com>
 <CAMU0wT7uE2sCtjkWBr1h6n9=z+gUaSYw7v24TtPV55tGmz+51A@mail.gmail.com>
 <3DF8F1E9-76CF-44D0-8515-37DCBAC106BE@steffann.nl>
Message-ID: <AM7PR03MB6451DAED19E539C4284F6BCAEE5E9@AM7PR03MB6451.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>

Sander -

You and I agree on many things - we will differ on this one.

If you wish to show your identity documents to AfriNIC though that is your choice - but it is a choice - me? I choose not to show a document which contains sensitive information to just anyone.

My birthday - they can have - my name they know well - my identification number and/or passport number has nothing to do with them.

I might point out that a lot of people submitted such data to AfriNIC once upon a time for dealing with customs and visas for a particular meeting - said information ended up.... let's just say a lot more public than it should have been.

Sorry - not happening

Andrew

Get Outlook for iOS<https://aka.ms/o0ukef>
________________________________
From: Sander Steffann <sander at steffann.nl>
Sent: Monday, January 24, 2022 8:38:12 PM
To: General Discussions of AFRINIC <community-discuss at afrinic.net>
Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] ID verification on the Database Working Group mailing list

Hi all.

There has been a lot of discussion about what is justified and necessary. I personally have no problem with showing my identity card to Afrinic, and have done so. It's not like my identity is a secret :)

My contact info is well documented in the RIPE database:

person: Sander Steffann
org: ORG-SSP3-RIPE
address: SJM Steffann Automatisering
address: Tienwoningenweg 46
address: 7312 DN Apeldoorn
address: The Netherlands
phone: +31 6 22660412
e-mail: sander at steffann.nl
notify: sander at steffann.nl
nic-hdl: SJMS1-RIPE
mnt-by: STEFFANN-MNT
created: 2005-10-20T08:23:25Z
last-modified: 2017-03-17T00:02:24Z
source: RIPE

My birthday is the 16th of August, and I like single malt whisky ;)

Cheers,
Sander


_______________________________________________
Community-Discuss mailing list
Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss<https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20220124/b61eb48b/attachment.html>

From rfg at tristatelogic.com  Mon Jan 24 21:41:09 2022
From: rfg at tristatelogic.com (Ronald F. Guilmette)
Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2022 13:41:09 -0800
Subject: [Community-Discuss] ID verification on the Database Working
	Group mailing list
In-Reply-To: <AM7PR03MB645111558A560706935F735DEE5E9@AM7PR03MB6451.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
Message-ID: <5317.1643060469@segfault.tristatelogic.com>

In message <AM7PR03MB645111558A560706935F735DEE5E9 at AM7PR03MB6451.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>, 
Andrew Alston <Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com> wrote:

>If AfriNIC chooses to remove me from the lists because I refuse to hand over ID
>documents ? while they are quite ok with taking my money as an authorized admin
>contact ? then in effect, they are no longer providing the service that a full
>RIR providers to other members, based on a requirement that they have no
>mandate to implement.
>
>AfriNIC cannot guarantee the security of information provided.

I feel that I should perhaps apologize to everyone.

I put forward the idea that AFRINIC should do SOMETHING to get rid of the
sockpuppets on the mailing lists, so I guess this is all partially my fault,
and I accept my share of responsibility for that.

Please note however that what I had suggested was rather dramatically different
from what seems to have been actually adopted/implemented by AFRINIC.

I had suggested that there should be some vetting of mailing list participants
*only* when and if the bona fides of certain individual ones were questioned,
directly, and off-list, to postmaster at afrinic.net.  I never envisioned that
the entire list membership should be vetted!!  And certainly that is dramatic
overkill... like using a shotgun to kill a fly.

Furthermore, like Andrew, I also am more than a little concerned about the
security of any documents that *I* might now be obliged to submit, if I should
wish to stay on the mailing list.

I have nothing else to say about this other than that it is my personal wish
that this vetting only be applied in cases where legitimate questions about
the bona fides of individual mailing list participants have been raised.
And I must agree with Andrew that it makes no real sense to demand bona fides
from mailing list participants that are both clearly and historically associated
with dues paying members of AFRINIC.  (I am not one of those, so I guess that
if it is deemed necessary, I personally will have to submit to this new protocol
if I want to stay on the list, but Andrew and others that are well known in the
community AND associated with dues-paying members certainly should not have to
endure this virtual strip-search.)

It *is* essential to eject the sockpuppets from the mailing lists, however this
goal can be achieved with a much lighter touch, and without making dozens or
hundreds of mailing list participants, about whome no question has ever been
raised, give up personal information.


Regards,
rfg



From ubah.tonyiyke at gmail.com  Mon Jan 24 21:51:59 2022
From: ubah.tonyiyke at gmail.com (Anthony Ubah)
Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2022 16:51:59 -0500
Subject: [Community-Discuss] ID verification on the Database Working
 Group mailing list
In-Reply-To: <3DF8F1E9-76CF-44D0-8515-37DCBAC106BE@steffann.nl>
References: <3B0A2103-5FAA-4079-A82E-4B226FED0862@delong.com>
 <B308B4D0-6876-4616-AAB1-A691A457340E@delong.com>
 <AM7PR03MB64513B3A9823B5CD1FDD3D9BEE5E9@AM7PR03MB6451.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
 <AM7PR03MB645111558A560706935F735DEE5E9@AM7PR03MB6451.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
 <D0CE4B21-BC7B-43C2-9510-A3C63BBC4B7B@gmail.com>
 <20220124093511.6qyehd2wyibk7xfz@benm-laptop>
 <5A7FC5B6-29D2-4D34-B3DB-5FE3D67BA9DF@gmail.com>
 <20220124100855.xbwtegwjawbznql5@benm-laptop>
 <AM7PR03MB6451D60FF59B2FDD02691E8FEE5E9@AM7PR03MB6451.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
 <CAHcb0AQDw3GXcgKkivZGXAwDfNksAgnv68b=YeUOZPB0xWyYQw@mail.gmail.com>
 <AM7PR03MB645156E3CA7FFA266EBD4241EE5E9@AM7PR03MB6451.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
 <CF03A608-08C2-4B47-AF5E-62C61764120A@gmail.com>
 <CAMU0wT7uE2sCtjkWBr1h6n9=z+gUaSYw7v24TtPV55tGmz+51A@mail.gmail.com>
 <3DF8F1E9-76CF-44D0-8515-37DCBAC106BE@steffann.nl>
Message-ID: <CAHcb0AQF-m-HfXFRL-mMaThWtxxjODiO6i_a+ROCbKQo1vPO1g@mail.gmail.com>

Hi Sander,

I know quoting self is a bit like a male puppy and it's crutch, but permit
me to.
>
> ".. while some members own, or are co-founders of their organizations,
> some spend a bulk of/their entire career in one, while others are in
> constant movent across organizations and regions. *Different strokes for
> different folks.*"


I live Malk Wisky too.

Cheers

Anthony

On Mon, Jan 24, 2022, 12:39 PM Sander Steffann <sander at steffann.nl> wrote:

> Hi all.
>
> There has been a lot of discussion about what is justified and necessary.
> I personally have no problem with showing my identity card to Afrinic, and
> have done so. It's not like my identity is a secret :)
>
> My contact info is well documented in the RIPE database:
>
> person:          Sander Steffann
> org:             ORG-SSP3-RIPE
> address:         SJM Steffann Automatisering
> address:         Tienwoningenweg 46
> address:         7312 DN Apeldoorn
> address:         The Netherlands
> phone:           +31 6 22660412
> e-mail:          sander at steffann.nl
> notify:          sander at steffann.nl
> nic-hdl:         SJMS1-RIPE
> mnt-by:          STEFFANN-MNT
> created:         2005-10-20T08:23:25Z
> last-modified:   2017-03-17T00:02:24Z
> source:          RIPE
>
> My birthday is the 16th of August, and I like single malt whisky ;)
>
> Cheers,
> Sander
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20220124/5b247200/attachment.html>

From rfg at tristatelogic.com  Mon Jan 24 22:08:53 2022
From: rfg at tristatelogic.com (Ronald F. Guilmette)
Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2022 14:08:53 -0800
Subject: [Community-Discuss] ID verification on the Database Working
	Group mailing list
In-Reply-To: <D0CE4B21-BC7B-43C2-9510-A3C63BBC4B7B@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <5526.1643062133@segfault.tristatelogic.com>

In message <D0CE4B21-BC7B-43C2-9510-A3C63BBC4B7B at gmail.com>, 
Mike Silber <silber.mike at gmail.com> wrote:

>I have no issue with comments from users using pseudonyms - provided
>they have a complete SOI setting out their affiliations to avoid the
>*real* concern with such users, namely sock-puppets and astroturfing.

Just FYI -- I personally am hyper-UNaffiliated.

I like to think that I have been around long enough and know enough real
people that this would not be an issue in my case, but maybe not.


Regards,
rfg




From comms at afrinic.net  Tue Jan 25 12:40:46 2022
From: comms at afrinic.net (AFRINIC Communication)
Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2022 16:40:46 +0400
Subject: [Community-Discuss] Update on the ID verification process on the
	DBWG mailing list
Message-ID: <4EBD4A5C-9275-4CC2-AF6C-334E885B3B19@afrinic.net>

Dear colleagues,

Thank you for the feedback we have received on the new ID verification platform on the AFRINIC DBWG mailing list. So far we have completed the verification of 55 users out of the total of 74 on the AFRINIC DBWG mailing list.

We have resolved several issues on technicalities on the ID verification form following the feedback we received. 

We are still hearing you and working on improving the process as we continue to receive more feedback from our community.

Following the concerns raised on data protection, we would like to reassure our community that the ID Verification process is handled entirely by an accredited party SumSub (https://sumsub.com/) and AFRINIC will only  keep name, email and the results of ID verification.

The ID verification documents submitted on the SumSub platform are subsequently destroyed following the ID verification as per our agreement with SumSub.

We hope that above brings clarifications to some of your concerns and we welcome more comments as we go through this process.

Once the process is complete with the DBWG mailing list, we will draw some conclusion and advise on the next steps.
.
Regards,

AFRINIC Team

??????????????????????????.


Chers coll?gues,

Nous vous remercions pour les commentaires que nous avons re?us sur la nouvelle plateforme de v?rification d'identit? sur la liste de diffusion du DBWG AFRINIC. Jusqu'? pr?sent, nous avons termin? la v?rification de 55 utilisateurs sur un total de 74 sur la liste de diffusion du DBWG d'AFRINIC.

Nous avons r?solu plusieurs probl?mes techniques sur le formulaire de v?rification d'identit?, suite aux commentaires que nous avons re?us. 

Nous continuons ? vous ?couter et ? travailler ? l'am?lioration du processus au fur et ? mesure que nous recevons des commentaires de notre communaut?.

Suite aux pr?occupations soulev?es sur la protection des donn?es, nous souhaitons rassurer notre communaut? que le processus de v?rification d'identit? est enti?rement g?r? par une partie accr?dit?e SumSub (https://sumsub.com/)) et AFRINIC ne conservera que le nom, l'email et les r?sultats de la v?rification d'identit?.

Le processus de v?rification d'identit? est enti?rement g?r? par une partie accr?dit?e, SumSub (https://sumsub.com/)).

Les documents de v?rification d'identit? soumis sur la plateforme SumSub sont ensuite d?truits apr?s la v?rification d'identit?, conform?ment ? notre accord avec SumSub.

Nous esp?rons que ce qui pr?c?de apporte des ?claircissements ? certaines de vos pr?occupations et nous serons heureux de recevoir d'autres commentaires au fur et ? mesure de l'avancement de ce processus.

Une fois le processus termin? avec la liste de diffusion du DBWG, nous tirerons quelques conclusions et conseillerons sur les prochaines ?tapes.

Cordialement,

L?Equipe AFRINIC


From comms at afrinic.net  Fri Jan 28 11:21:37 2022
From: comms at afrinic.net (AFRINIC Communication)
Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2022 15:21:37 +0400
Subject: [Community-Discuss] Feedback and Update on ID Verification on the
	DBWG Mailing list
Message-ID: <B8296BA0-95E5-4F49-8BB1-48C0B91B882B@afrinic.net>

Dear community and members,

We thank you for the feedback received on the ID verification process that is currently ongoing. So far, more than 70 percent of the subscribers (57 out of 79) of the DBWG mailing list have gone through the ID verification process. 

We would like to clarify that  we are using the DBWG mailing list as a platform for piloting the project of ID verification on mailing lists at AFRINIC. 

We intend to use the experience from this pilot as well as all the feedback we received on the different mailing lists to make a proper assessment of the process.

The decision on the way forward for the various mailing lists will be done after the consultation of the members of these lists in light of the above outcome. 

We wish to also highlight that the members-discuss list has not been considered for the ID verification. 

We again thank you for your feedback on this process. 

Regards,

AFRINIC Team

????????????????????

Ch?re communaut? et chers membres,

Nous vous remercions pour les commentaires re?us sur le processus de v?rification d'identit? qui est actuellement en cours. Jusqu'? pr?sent, plus de 70 % des abonn?s (57 sur 79) de la liste de diffusion du DBWG sont pass?s par le processus de v?rification d'identit?. 

Nous tenons ? pr?ciser que nous utilisons la liste de diffusion du DBWG comme plateforme pour piloter le projet de v?rification d'identit? sur les listes de diffusion ? AFRINIC. Nous avons l'intention d'utiliser l'exp?rience de ce pilote ainsi que tous les commentaires que nous avons re?us sur les diff?rentes listes de diffusion pour faire une ?valuation correcte du processus.

La d?cision sur la marche ? suivre pour les diff?rentes listes de diffusion sera prise apr?s la consultation des membres de ces listes ? la lumi?re des r?sultats ci-dessus.

Nous souhaitons ?galement souligner que la liste de discussion des membres n'a pas ?t? prise en compte pour la v?rification d?identit?.

Nous vous remercions encore pour vos commentaires sur ce processus. 


Cordialement,

L'?quipe AFRINIC


From comms at afrinic.net  Fri Jan 28 12:56:54 2022
From: comms at afrinic.net (AFRINIC Communication)
Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2022 16:56:54 +0400
Subject: [Community-Discuss] Call for Expression of Interest (EOI) for two
 positions in the Appeal Committee
Message-ID: <4A3ED9AA-C717-4163-B604-C16BC9C03C07@afrinic.net>

Dear colleagues,
 
A call for Expression of Interest (EOI) is hereby made for the two positions in the AFRINIC Policy Development Appeal Committee. A  former PDWG Co-Chair is eligible for one position and an active participant of the PDWG is eligible for the other position.

More information on the AFRINIC Policy Development Appeal Committee is available here >>https://afrinic.net/policy/appeal-committee#tor <https://afrinic.net/policy/appeal-committee#tor>
The deadline for application for these positions is 11th February 2022. 

Please send your application to>> legal[at]afrinic.net


We look forward to receiving your application.


Yours Sincerely, 
 
Eddy Kayihura 
AFRINIC CEO
ceo at afrinic.net <mailto:ceo at afrinic.net>

????????????..


Chers coll?gues,
 
Un appel ? manifestation d'int?r?t est ouvert pour les deux postes du Comit? d'appel pour l'?laboration des politiques d'AFRINIC. Les parties repr?sentantes doivent ?tre un ancien copr?sident du PDWG et un participant actif du PDWG.

La date limite de candidature pour ces postes est le 11 f?vrier 2022. Veuillez envoyer votre candidature ? legal[at]afrinic.net.

Pour plus d'informations sur le Comit? d'appel pour l'?laboration des politiques d'AFRINIC, voir : https://afrinic.net/policy/appeal-committee#tor.

Nous nous r?jouissons de recevoir votre candidature.

Cordialement,
Eddy Kayihura
CEO AFRINIC
ceo at afrinic.net <mailto:ceo at afrinic.net>
???????..


?????? ????????
 
??? ????? ???? ??????? ?? ???????? (EOI) ????? ??? ???????? ?? ???? ??????? ????? ????? AFRINIC. ?????? ??????? ?????? ?? PDWG ???? ????? ???? ???????? ????? ?? PDWG ???? ???? ???? ???.

????? ?????? ?? ????????? ??? ???? ??????? ????? ????? AFRINIC ??? >> https://afrinic.net/policy/appeal-committee#tor

?????? ??????? ?????? ??????? ???? ??????? ?? 11 ?????? 2022.

?????? ????? ???? ??? >> legal [at] afrinic.net


???? ????? ??? ???? ????.


?????? ????? ???? ?????????
 
???? ????????
?????? ???????? ????? AFRINIC
ceo at afrinic.net
??????..

Caros colegas,
 
? feito um apelo ? express?o de interesse (EOI) para as duas posi??es no Comit? de Apelo para o Desenvolvimento da Pol?tica AFRINIC. Um antigo co-presidente do PDWG ? eleg?vel para uma posi??o e um participante activo do PDWG ? eleg?vel para a outra posi??o.

Mais informa??es sobre o Comit? de Apelo para o Desenvolvimento de Pol?ticas da AFRINIC est?o dispon?veis aqui >>https://afrinic.net/policy/appeal-committee#tor

O prazo para a candidatura a estas posi??es ? 11 de Fevereiro de 2022.

Por favor envie a sua candidatura para>> legal[at]afrinic.net

Aguardamos com expectativa a recep??o da sua candidatura.


Atenciosamente,
 
Eddy Kayihura
DIRECTOR EXECUTIVO AFR?NICO
ceo at afrinic.net

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20220128/73a6e0ef/attachment.html>

From comms at afrinic.net  Fri Jan 28 13:02:11 2022
From: comms at afrinic.net (AFRINIC Communication)
Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2022 17:02:11 +0400
Subject: [Community-Discuss] Filling of Casual Vacancy for Seat 4 on the
	AFRINIC Board
Message-ID: <6E29D5F4-6DD6-4071-A226-EB17A84FFB46@afrinic.net>

Dear AFRINIC Members and Community,

The AFRINIC Board hereby calls for Expression of Interest (EOI) from persons residing in the Central African sub-region who wish to be considered for appointment to fill a casual vacancy for Seat 4 on the Board in terms of Article 13.14 of the AFRINIC Bylaws. Any appointment to this vacant seat will be for a period until the next AFRINIC Annual General Members Meeting (AGMM) in June 2022.

In line with Article 13.10 of the AFRINIC bylaws, no person shall be appointed or hold office as a Director if he is a person who:  

(i) is under 18 years of age;
(ii) is an undischarged bankrupt;
(iii) would, but for the repeal of Section 117 of the Companies Act 1984 of Mauritius, be prohibited from being a Director or promoter of, or being concerned or taking part in the management of, a company within the meaning of that Act;
(iv) is prohibited from being a director or promoter of or being concerned or taking part in the management of a company under Sections 337 or 338 of the Companies Act Act;
(v) is not a natural person; or (vi) has been adjudged to have been of unsound mind.
(vii) by virtue of the constitution of a company, does not comply with any qualifications for directors.

Anyone who expresses interest shall be available and committed to participate in Board meetings and other AFRINIC activities (face-to-face and online). 
If you would like to be considered for the vacant seat, please complete the form here>>https://registration.afrinic.net/forms/node/23 <https://registration.afrinic.net/forms/node/23>
Applications should be received no later than 23:59 UTC on 11 February 2022. 

Regards,  

Eddy Kayihura 
AFRINIC CEO
ceo at afrinic.net <mailto:ceo at afrinic.net>
????????????????????..     










FRENCH

Chers membre et communaut? d'AFRINIC,

Le Conseil d'administration d'AFRINIC lance un appel ? manifestation d'int?r?t aupr?s des personnes r?sidant en Afrique australe qui souhaitent ?tre consid?r?es pour une ?ventuelle nomination au poste vacant du si?ge 4 du Conseil d'administration, conform?ment ? l'article 13.14 des statuts d'AFRINIC.  Toute nomination ? ce si?ge vacant se fera pour une p?riode allant jusqu'? la prochaine AGMM d'AFRINIC, en juin 2022. 

Conform?ment ? l'article 13.10 des statuts d?AFRINIC, nul ne peut ?tre nomm? ou occuper un poste de directeur si il / elle :

(i) est ?g? de moins de 18 ans ; 
(ii) est un failli non lib?r? ; 
(iii) serait, sans l'abrogation de la section 117 du Companies Act 1984 de Maurice, il lui serait interdit d'?tre directeur ou promoteur, ou d'?tre concern? ou de prendre part ? la gestion d'une entreprise. d'?tre concern? ou de prendre part ? la gestion d'une soci?t? au sens de la au sens de cette loi ;
 (iv) n'a pas le droit d'?tre un directeur ou un promoteur, ni d'?tre concern? ou de prendre part ? la gestion d'une soci?t? au sens de cette loi. ou de participer ? la gestion d'une soci?t? en vertu des articles 337 ou 338 de la loi sur les soci?t?s ; 
(v) n'est pas une personne physique ; ou (vi) a ?t? jug? comme n'?tant pas sain d'esprit.
 (vii) en vertu de la constitution d'une soci?t?, ne satisfait pas ? l'une quelconque des qualifications pour les directeurs. 

Si vous souhaitez ?tre consid?r? pour le si?ge vacant, veuillez remplir le formulaire ?  https://registration.afrinic.net/forms/node/23 <https://registration.afrinic.net/forms/node/23> au plus tard le 11 f?vrier 2022  ? 23h59 UTC. 

 Cordialement, 
 Eddy Kayihura
 AFRINIC CEO

????????..















ARABIC

?????? ????? ?????? AFRINIC ?

???? ???? ????? AFRINIC ????? ??? ??? ????? ???????? ?? ??????? ???????? ?? ??????? ??????? ???? ??????? ????? ?????? ?? ????? ?? ??????? ???? ???? ???? ?????? 4 ?? ???? ??????? ????? ?????? 13.14 ?? ??????? ???????? ?? AFRINIC. ????? ?? ????? ?? ??? ?????? ?????? ????? ??? ???????? ?????? ?????? ??????? ?? AFRINIC AGMM ? ?? ????? 2022.

??????? ?? ?????? 13.10 ?? ??????? ???????? ?? AFRINIC ? ?? ???? ????? ?? ??? ?? ???? ???? ???? ??? ??? ?????:

(?) ?? ???? ?? ????? 18 ????? ?
(2) ????? ??? ???? ?
(3) ? ???? ????? ????? 117 ?? ????? ??????? ???? 1984 ????????? ? ????? ?? ?? ???? ?????? ?? ?????? ????? ?? ?????? ?? ????? ?? ????? ???? ??????? ??????? ?? ??? ??????? ?
 (4) ???? ???? ?? ???? ?????? ?? ?????? ?? ?? ???? ?????? ?? ????? ?? ????? ???? ????? ???????? 337 ?? 338 ?? ????? ??????? ?
 (5) ??? ????? ??????? ? ?? (6) ??? ???? ???? ??? ???? ?????.
 (7) ????? ????? ?????? ? ?? ?????? ?? ?? ?????? ????????.

??? ?? ???? ?? ??? ???? ?? ??????? ?????? ???????? ????????? ?? ???????? ???? ??????? ?????? AFRINIC ?????? (????? ???? ???? ????????). ??? ??? ???? ?? ?????? ??? ?????? ?????? ? ???? ????? ??????? ???:

https://registration.afrinic.net/forms/node/23 <https://registration.afrinic.net/forms/node/23> ? ?? ???? ?? ?????? ?????? 23:59 ???????? ??????? ?????? ?? 11 ?????? 2022.

??????
???? ????????
?????? ???????? ????? AFRINIC

??????????????????
















PORTUGUESE

Caros membros e comunidade AFRINIC,

O Conselho AFRINIC apela a manifesta??es de interesse de pessoas residentes na sub-regi?o da ?frica Central que desejem ser consideradas para nomea??o para preencher uma vaga casual para o lugar 4 no Conselho nos termos do artigo 13.14 dos Estatutos da AFRINIC.   Qualquer nomea??o para este lugar vago ser? por um per?odo at? ? pr?xima AGMM AFR?NICA regularmente agendada, em Junho de 2022.

Em conformidade com o artigo 13.10 dos Estatutos da AFRINIC, nenhuma pessoa ser? nomeada ou ocupar? um cargo de Director se for uma pessoa que ocupe o cargo:  

(i) seja menor de 18 anos de idade;
(ii) seja uma pessoa em situa??o de fal?ncia n?o apurada;
(iii) estaria, mas pela revoga??o do artigo 117 da lei das sociedades de 1984 da Maur?cia, proibida de ser director ou promotor de uma sociedade na acep??o da referida lei, ou de estar envolvido ou participar na gest?o de uma sociedade na acep??o da mesma;
 iv) est? proibido de ser director ou promotor de, ou de estar interessado ou participar na gest?o de uma sociedade, nos termos dos artigos 337 ou 338 do Companies Act;
 (v) n?o seja uma pessoa singular; ou (vi) tenha sido julgada como tendo sido de esp?rito insensato.
 (vii) em virtude da constitui??o de uma sociedade, n?o cumpre quaisquer qualifica??es para administradores.

Qualquer pessoa que manifeste interesse deve estar dispon?vel e empenhada em participar nas reuni?es do Conselho de Administra??o e outras actividades AFRINIC (presencialmente e em linha).  Se desejar ser considerado para o lugar vago, queira preencher o formul?rio em:

https://registration.afrinic.net/forms/node/23 <https://registration.afrinic.net/forms/node/23> , o mais tardar ?s 23:59 UTC de 11 de Fevereiro de 2022.

Cumprimentos,  
Eddy Kayihura
DIRECTOR EXECUTIVO AFR?NICO
_______________________________________________
Members-Discuss mailing list
Members-Discuss at afrinic.net <mailto:Members-Discuss at afrinic.net>
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/members-discuss <https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/members-discuss>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20220128/53cbf6ac/attachment.html>