North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical RE: Recent NANOG postings
Yes, the spoofs may occasionally get out of hand. However, there may be a reason why - namely the unfortunate increase in clueless or uninformed postings. Personally, I would much rather have a good laugh from reading such a parody, then read about some crazy scheme or unresearched query. I would strongly object to banning any entire domain from this mailing list. Additionally, the practice of banning folks for "off-topic" posting seems rather unevenly applied - spam is, by definition, off-topic to NANOG, and yet long threads discuss it. Perhaps we should all look to our own houses, before we criticize others. - Daniel Golding On Mon, 16 Sep 2002, Ralph Doncaster wrote: > > On Mon, 16 Sep 2002, Al Rowland wrote: > > > I'm sure it would be a trivial matter for merit to recover the full > > headers of the original and forward to [email protected] for action > > against whomever is (quite poorly) impersonating Ms. Harris. > > Hushmail's domains are registered to some offshore company, though they > get connectivity from NetNation in Calgary, AB. They don't seem to > respond to abuse reports. NetNation at least responds, but won't give any > contact info out for real people at HushMail. > > It would seem in this case the only action that is sure to work is to make > a John Doe claim in a Canadian court, then file a subpoena against > NetNation for Canadian business address of HushMail, and then subpoena > HushMail's records. > > In Susan's case she's a short drive from Windsor, Ontario, and the court > filings could be done in small claims court so the fees wouldn't exceed a > couple hundred dollars. > > Since Hushmail offers free accounts the original offender can just sign up > again under another anonymous ID and start the process all over. It would > seem the offender has mocked not only myself and Susan, but the process > for keeping unwanted posters off the list. At some point in the future it > may become necessary to block whole domains from having posting > privileges. > > -Ralph > >
|