Subject: Question about list members masquerading as someone else

From: [email-masked]
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 02:14:53 -0400

I have a situation on my list where I am fairly sure someone has signed on 
with a fictitious name.  Not a problem really, lots of people do this. 
However, in this case, this "new person" on the list is making comments 
defending a position and making comments like "you lie..." etc.  The real 
problem is this new person is defending the position that someone on the 
list can not get anyone else to agree to - and several of us are fairly 
sure that the "new person" is indeed the same person who had made the 
original position statement.

Has anyone else run into this on their list?  If so, how did you handle 
it?  You can't come out on the list and say "hm, Mr. so and so, are you 
really who you say your are or are you an alias for ....."  This one is 
tricky and this person is now really causing the list to turn into a ugly 
and nasty mess.  Before I do what I have planned, I wanted to poll the 
other chairs first.  Don't you just love this non-paying stress 
jobs....8-( 
___________________
Patricia Egen Consulting
www.egenconsulting.com
423-875-2652

---

From: Avri Doria <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 16:00:07 +0900

In some ways it might not matter if the person is masquerading.  If she 
or he is being disruptive and using personal invective, you probably 
have sufficient cause to warn and then restrict from the list.

I would not in any case make a public list accusation of pretended 
identity. Something like that would very hard to prove.

a.

On måndag, sep 15, 2003, at 15:14 Asia/Seoul, [email-masked] 
wrote:

>
> I have a situation on my list where I am fairly sure someone has 
> signed on with a fictitious name.  Not a problem really, lots of 
> people do this.  However, in this case, this "new person" on the list 
> is making comments defending a position and making comments like "you 
> lie..." etc.  The real problem is this new person is defending the 
> position that someone on the list can not get anyone else to agree to 
> - and several of us are fairly sure that the "new person" is indeed 
> the same person who had made the original position statement.
>
> Has anyone else run into this on their list?  If so, how did you 
> handle it?  You can't come out on the list and say "hm, Mr. so and so, 
> are you really who you say your are or are you an alias for ....." 
>  This one is tricky and this person is now really causing the list to 
> turn into a ugly and nasty mess.  Before I do what I have planned, I 
> wanted to poll the other chairs first.  Don't you just love this 
> non-paying stress jobs....8-(
> ___________________
> Patricia Egen Consulting
> www.egenconsulting.com
> 423-875-2652

---

From: Spencer Dawkins <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 04:42:30 -0700 (PDT)

If you look back at the ASRG archives, they had a similar
situation a couple of months ago, and were looking at mail
headers for backup (the pop-up person was posting from the same
subnet as the lone voice in the wilderness). But I agree that
it's simpler to enforce civility than to prove that someone on
the Internet actually IS a dog...

Spencer

---

From: "James Kempf" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 08:42:32 -0700

Send them three RFC 2418-mode warning messages privately and if they do not
stop disrupting discussion, remove them from the mailing list. Probably best
to keep your AD in the loop on the entire process and have approval for the
final removal decision, in case the person appeals. If the person is serious
about IETF work and just has difficulty controlling themselves, they'll
probably stop after one or two warnings.

            jak

---

From: [email-masked]
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 11:23:00 -0400

Thanks for the clarification. 
___________________
Patricia Egen Consulting
www.egenconsulting.com
423-875-2652

"Steven M. Bellovin" <[email-masked]> 
09/16/2003 11:16 AM

To
"James Kempf" <[email-masked]>
cc
[email-masked], [email-masked]
Subject
Re: Question about list members masquerading as someone else

In message <01f401c37b9f$fa516280$956015ac@dclkempt40>, "James Kempf" 
>probably stop after one or two warnings.

You MUST involve the AD -- 2418 says that removal can be done only by
the AD with the approval of the IESG.

--Steve Bellovin, http://www.research.att.com/~smb

---

From: Margaret Wasserman <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 11:30:21 -0400

Actually, RFC 2418 does not authorize a WG chair to remove
someone from an IETF mailing list.  As I was very surprised
to discover recently, RFC 2418 reserves this authority to the
responsible AD, with the approval of the IESG.

The applicable section of RFC 2418 says:

"As with face-to-face sessions occasionally one or more
individuals may engage in behavior on a mailing list
which disrupts the WG's progress. In these cases the Chair
should attempt to discourage the behavior by communication
directly with the offending individual rather than on the
open mailing list. If the behavior persists then the Chair
must involve the Area Director in the issue. As a last
resort and after explicit warnings, the Area Director, with
the approval of the IESG, may request that the mailing list
maintainer block the ability of the offending individual to
post to the mailing list. (If the mailing list software
permits this type of operation.) Even if this is done, the
individual must not be prevented from receiving messages
posted to the list. Other methods of mailing list control
may be considered but must be approved by the AD(s) and
the IESG."

Margaret

---

From: "James Kempf" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 08:32:18 -0700

Thanx for the clarification.

After reading through this message, I realized it might sound a bit harsh,
but unfortunately, having suffered through this situation myself, where
someone managed to disrupt a mailing list for three months, I feel very much
in agreement with Fred Baker's comments in the plenary in Vienna: the IETF
tolerates conduct on its mailing lists that no other professional
organization would tolerate. I think we would do well to re-examine this
tendency, and not wait until people's behavior became completely outrageous
before ejecting them.

But that's a discussion for the problem list, so I'll leave it at that.

            jak

---

From: [email-masked]
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 11:42:42 -0400

Sounds like time for me to download the RFC 2418 for some evening reading.
___________________
Patricia Egen Consulting
www.egenconsulting.com
423-875-2652

Margaret Wasserman <[email-masked]> 
09/16/2003 11:30 AM

To
"James Kempf" <[email-masked]>
cc
<[email-masked]>, <[email-masked]>
Subject
Re: Question about list members masquerading as someone else

Margaret

> > I have a situation on my list where I am fairly sure someone has 
signed on
> > Has anyone else run into this on their list?  If so, how did you 
handle

---

From: [email-masked]
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 11:45:36 -0400

I agree.  We do need to re-examine mailing list ethics.  And until 
agressive tactics are in place, the foolishness will prevail. 

09/16/2003 11:32 AM

To

After reading through this message, I realized it might sound a bit harsh,
but unfortunately, having suffered through this situation myself, where
someone managed to disrupt a mailing list for three months, I feel very 
much
in agreement with Fred Baker's comments in the plenary in Vienna: the IETF
tolerates conduct on its mailing lists that no other professional
organization would tolerate. I think we would do well to re-examine this
tendency, and not wait until people's behavior became completely 
outrageous
before ejecting them.

jak

---

From: Jaap Akkerhuis <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 21:24:04 +0200

And that makes sense. Not all WG mailings lists are administrated
by the wgchairs.  As example, the enum-WG is maintained by two
people (me included) and we are just doing the slave labor.

	jaap

---

From: "Steven M. Bellovin" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 11:16:20 -0400