[rpd] Policy supremacy

[Mike Burns]

Hi,

I don't think that is the answer. The forum should remain open to all contributors.
Remember it is not the speaker, it is the argument that matters.
If you or anybody else wishes to include their bona fides, that is fine, but not gatekeeping contributors.
A very bad idea, to my mind, and a sledgehammer approach to a few AI tinged posts.
I think we have to acknowledge the use of AI in writing posts will increase, and that is not always a bad thing.

Regards,
Mike


-----Original Message-----
From: Jaco Kroon via RPD <rpd at afrinic.net> 
Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2026 10:01 AM
To: rpd at afrinic.net
Subject: Re: [rpd] Policy supremacy

Hi,

Are we thus proposing that each and every person must positively identify themselves prior to being subscribed to the RPD list, as well as for all existing subscribers to be positively identified by date X or be unsubscribed?  To what extend should this identification go - should it include affiliation checking, eg, Jaco Kroon actually JK19-AFRINIC in the whois db - from where you can track the networks I'm involved with?

I'd be in support of such a policy change/direction.

Regarding use of AI, I don't have a particular objection to the use of LLMs (but having worked on the Comp-Sci side of things ... I would not trust them without validating whatever they spit out - and recent experience - not restricted to this ML - shows they spit out more garbage than most community-driven support forums), as long as they're used sensibly to help with formatting and/or interpretation of emails, not to spew out noise for the sake of noise - as what it feels has been done the last week or two.

Kind regards,
Jaco

n 2026/07/22 15:52, Diroi Karalis wrote:

> Dear Musa,
>
> Tshepo and Gugu don't need prior recognition from established 
> participants before their input counts. Joining recently, missing 
> earlier meetings, or sharing similar views is not evidence of 
> impersonation or bad faith. Anyone is entitled to join an open process 
> at Last Call and raise objections before a proposal becomes policy.
> KYC would be a significant procedural and privacy change. It can't be 
> applied selectively to objectors we don't recognize it would need a 
> formal basis, a clear justification, proper safeguards, and equal 
> application to every participant, not just the inconvenient ones.
> If you have evidence of misconduct, send it to the co-chairs. 
> Otherwise, engage with Tshepo and Gugu's arguments on their merits. 
> Familiarity isn't authority, and "the community" isn't a closed circle 
> that gets to decide who's allowed in.
>
> Regards,
> Diroi
>
> _______________________________________________
> RPD mailing list
> RPD at afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd

_______________________________________________
RPD mailing list
RPD at afrinic.net
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd