[Community-Discuss] ID verification on the Database Working Group mailing list
benm at workonline.africa
Mon Jan 24 10:57:19 UTC 2022
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
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
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the Community-Discuss