Authors | |
---|---|
Name: Jordi Palet Martinez Name: Edwin Salazar |
Name: Jordi Palet Martinez |
Summary | |
This proposal seeks to implement an Acceptable Use Policy (AUP) for the Policy List, as no such document currently exists. |
This proposal seeks to implement an Acceptable Use Policy (AUP) for the Policy List, as no such document currently exists. |
Rationale (Describe the problem you intend to solve) | |
On several occasions there have been annoying activities that are contrary to the purpose and spirit of the Policy List, cases of misuse, various attacks and even election advertising. Participants should have explicit knowledge of what can and cannot be done on the list, as well as of the potential penalties for infringing the rules. Otherwise, we will continue to see these actions that affect the community as a whole. The global nature of list participants and the fact that they are posting from different time zones make it impossible to solve this issue either permanently or repetitively by implementing a temporary moderation of the list. This moderation affects the openness of the list and especially its dynamics, two essential features of the Policy Development Process, which specifies that the list must be “completely open.” Any form of moderation constitutes censorship, even if only temporary, and therefore breaches the principle of openness. |
On several occasions there have been annoying activities that are contrary to the purpose and spirit of the Policy List, cases of misuse, various attacks and even election advertising. |
Current text | |
N/A |
N/A |
New text | |
(Note: The following text would be added at the end of the current PDP.) 8. Acceptable Use Policy (AUP) for the Public Policy List 8.1. Purpose, Operation and Acceptable Use of the Public Policy List The sole and exclusive purpose of the Public Policy List is the presentation and discussion of policy-related aspects, including ideas, suggestions, proposals, results of the PDP, and other clearly related aspects. Except in case of prior and explicit decision of the chairs, any discussion not in line with this purpose, such as event announcements, calls for papers, advertising of any kind (including electoral propaganda), expressions of support for candidates and, in general, any topic that is not explicitly policy-related, is outside the scope of this list. Note that the examples listed above are for illustrative purposes only. Only the chairs and/or LACNIC staff may call for and/or announce candidates and the voting procedure. The remaining steps of the procedure will necessarily take place off the list. By way of example, candidate nominations, expressions for or against a candidate or other similar actions are not allowed on the list. Only the chairs may issue a warning to those in violation of the AUP and take the corresponding actions, announcing their decision through the list. Any suspected violation must be reported exclusively to the chairs. LACNIC shall implement a system that guarantees that subscribers will read the PDP (and especially the AUP) and confirm its acceptance. Should they choose not to do so, they will only be able to receive messages from the list. If subscription reminders are sent, such messages must also remind subscribers of the AUP.” Likewise, at the bottom of each message, a link will be included to allow list subscribers to manage their subscription preferences. LACNIC shall incorporate systems that allow detecting, in so far as possible, the accounts used to breach the AUP. By way of an example, emails that are not part of the LACNIC domains may periodically be added to the list to serve as a honeypot. Mailing list posts are archived, they are publicly available and may not be censored by LACNIC. In very exceptional cases, the chairs may decide the temporary moderation of the list, informing of such moderation and the reasons for their decision, for example, to avoid “attacks” of any kind that might affect the normal functioning of the list. Such moderation will be only for brief, perfectly defined periods of time, ensuring that messages will not be delayed longer than strictly necessary. For this, the chairs will be supported by the staff. The AUP has been designed based on current use, as an official means of communication of the PDP, of the Public Policy List. However, if additional systems other than the list are used in the future (e.g. forums or applications) that “replicate” the list (i.e. if everything that is posted on the list is automatically posted on such systems and vice versa), the AUP will apply under the same or technically equivalent conditions. 8.2. Violations of the Applicable Use Policy (AUP) for the Policy List At the discretion of the chairs, the following may be considered violations of the AUP: In addition, if evidence exists: The chairs may determine what other actions also constitute unacceptable uses of the list. 8.3. Penalties in Case of Violation of the AUP Considering the global nature of list participants, when deciding on potential violations of the AUP, the chairs will take into account any relevant cultural aspects and language differences. At the discretion of the chairs, the first violation of the AUP may result in a temporary suspension of the offender's right to post to the list for a period of one (1) month, which may be extended up to one (1) year in case of a second violation. Successive violations may result in longer suspensions. Violations relating to election processes are considered extremely serious and may result in the loss of the right to participate as a candidate, as well as of the right to nominate candidates, in PDP election processes for two (2) years and for up to four (4) years in case of repeated violations. |
(Note: The following text would be added to the current PDP, possibly at the end of the existing text, at the disc |
Additional information | |
To implement this proposal, LACNIC must establish a mechanism for existing subscribers to receive and accept the AUP and the PDP such that no distinction is made between their participation and that of new subscribers. If the system used for the mailing list (mailman or similar) were to create any difficulties for the implementation the proposal, it is expected that the proposal can become effective once it reaches consensus, even if certain “technical” aspects cannot be immediately implemented. For example, it would be enough to immediately send the AUP to the Policy list without limiting subscribers’ ability to post to the list, and then, once the system is ready, subscribers would be required to accept the AUP in order to continue posting to the list. |
To implement this proposal, LACNIC must establish a mechanism for existing subscribers to receive and accept the AUP and the PDP such that there will be no distinction |
References | |
AUPs are commonly used for mailing lists, including those of several RIRs. Many examples were considered when drafting this proposal. |
AUPs are commonly used for mailing lists, including those of several RIRs. Many examples were considered when drafting this proposal. |