Fwd: [anti-abuse-wg] How to Ask For A Website to Be taken Down, was How Not To Ask For A Website to Be taken Down

In message <AANLkTim6d-VDGyjVWB9C6+dxEorSyCXjmrZKNO+npaWD at mail.gmail.com>, 
Mark Foster <blakjak at gmail.com> wrote:

>Concur, though again the use of automation means that the network provider
>can turn a blind eye to it and claim that appropriate action is being
>taken...

Those so inclined are already doing that anyway, automation or no automation.

>... it doesn't inspire folks to manually check to ensure action is
>infact being taken, that reports aren't repeat in nature, etc.

I'm not persuaded that it deters such follow-up either.

As I (sort of) said earlier, we have have all the standards we want for
WHO to report network abuse to, and even HOW gto report it, but until we
have a standard that says what any decent self-respecting network operator
or service provider should actually DO, at a minimum, in response to such
reports, nothing is going to be any better than it is right now.  (It may
also not get any better even _after_ we have a formal BCP that we can
try to shame wayward providers with, but at least it will be entirely less
ambiguous who is and isn't living up to their community responsibilities,
once a BCP for abuse handling is ratified and in place.)


Regards,
rfg