[rpd] Policy supremacy

[NP Petronella]

Dear colleagues,

That reasoning is circular: because unfamiliar participants object to mandatory identity verification, their objection is treated as proof that verification is necessary.

New mailboxes and shared concerns do not establish impersonation. Message volume can be managed through moderation and consolidation. If there is actual evidence of false identity or abuse, submit it to the co-chairs.

Mandatory verification would require a formal proposal, demonstrated necessity, privacy safeguards, and equal application to every participant. It cannot be improvised as an entrance test for people whose views are unpopular.

Turning a traffic concern into authority to screen participants is not openness. It is mandate laundering.

Regards,
Nonhlanhla

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/attachments/20260722/142867ad/attachment.html>