IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Sergeant at arms: please deal with mars.techno.cat@gmail.com

TSG - personal <tglassey@earthlink.net> Wed, 30 October 2013 21:27 UTC

Return-Path: <tglassey@earthlink.net>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C890711E819F for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 30 Oct 2013 14:27:20 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id kHW-yf9LMTuW for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 30 Oct 2013 14:27:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from elasmtp-mealy.atl.sa.earthlink.net (elasmtp-mealy.atl.sa.earthlink.net [209.86.89.69]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DFD1B11E8274 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 30 Oct 2013 14:27:04 -0700 (PDT)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=kb8O2QkMMYdRRUI17UoWzcr29/sTINFQ3LIRAx5btRa1Qm0vrJ1q0ZSOdqf9SDUd; h=Received:Message-ID:Date:From:User-Agent:MIME-Version:To:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP;
Received: from [67.180.133.21] (helo=localhost.localdomain) by elasmtp-mealy.atl.sa.earthlink.net with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from <tglassey@earthlink.net>) id 1VbdI2-0003yg-Tl for ietf@ietf.org; Wed, 30 Oct 2013 17:26:59 -0400
Message-ID: <527179A0.3080600@earthlink.net>
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2013 14:26:56 -0700
From: TSG - personal <tglassey@earthlink.net>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130917 Thunderbird/17.0.9
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: ietf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: Sergeant at arms: please deal with mars.techno.cat@gmail.com
References: <5262FB95.8080500@gmail.com> <CAK41CSRKhD9W5WWm3xBJeb4U8Q6TbfG1EHnY_0BN7fC1QvO=iA@mail.gmail.com> <52657B0B.3080701@gmail.com> <m21u3d5zvo.wl%randy@psg.com> <5266B4A4.9020301@dcrocker.net> <5266C6CA.30900@gmail.com> <0B5A250AE70FD6B21DD3CF4C@JcK-HP8200.jck.com> <5266CE7C.2020503@gmail.com> <61EE8145-2184-44C1-8163-424F97F8286C@piuha.net> <m261sp3u13.wl%randy@psg.com> <7F387505-3EBD-4DEC-8E9C-AB6D500F5396@nominum.com> <CAPv4CP-UPr5S8Z5PqF1bX0FWLOCZvrgjFog6-O-R8tN+ygVTCA@mail.gmail.com> <CF9872C2-828D-4C56-8A8D-836FF1BCDAA9@nominum.com> <m28uxkyovt.wl%randy@psg.com> <01OZZW7T12OY00004R@mauve.mrochek.com> <74F37EA0-42CD-4805-80CB-1C060F79FEB7@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <74F37EA0-42CD-4805-80CB-1C060F79FEB7@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-ELNK-Trace: 01b7a7e171bdf5911aa676d7e74259b7b3291a7d08dfec79746f4282b21155170f80dc69f12cf43e350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c
X-Originating-IP: 67.180.133.21
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2013 21:27:20 -0000

On 10/29/2013 03:38 PM, Douglas Otis wrote:

The real issue is how after the fact you would disprove digital 
tampering with the participation process... i.e. that censorship filters 
were not installed into the mailing process to

1)    Separate any voice setup to be isolated
2)     Send that person mail to make it look like they are still 
participating...
3)    Edit their commentary back in to the history file to complete the 
covering up of the fraud.

You would have to have multiple addresses for a number of lists right?

Todd


> On Oct 25, 2013, at 9:53 AM, ned+ietf@mauve.mrochek.com wrote:
>
>>> the chilling effect of vigilateism is far worse than spam or trolls.
>>> we've been dealing with the latter for decades, and there is little
>>> actual real harm if any.  the chilling effect of vigilanteism causes
>>> actual harm and reduces the rich diversity of opinion, culture, and
>>> viewpoint.
>> I could not agree more. By condoning such measures people are damaging the
>> diversity they are supposedly trying to support.
> Agreed.  Not all interests will be met but each should have a voice within an open and transparent process.  It would be a pity to allow censorship or political propriety to place this process behind hidden barriers.
>
> Regards,
> Douglas Otis

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email