Discuss mailing list

["Daniel Quintiliani" <danq AT runbox.com>]

I wasn't getting into whether OpenNIC should be forced to censor malware at 
the behest of random anti-virus companies. We already decided that Spamhaus 
would without any form of payment be given power to maintain an optional 
blacklist, and to bring that up again would require another thread, which I 
wasn't interested in doing.

--

-Dan Q

On Fri, 3 Nov 2017 21:13:05 -0600, Jeff Taylor <shdwdrgn AT sourpuss.net> wrote:

> We don't have to 'force' anybody to do anything.  If .bit wants to 
> continue hosting domains with no purpose other than distributing 
> malware, that is their right.  But opennic also has the right to not be 
> complicit in that distribution.
> 
> You seem to indicate you are against all forms of censorship.  So if 
> someone's computer gets infected and they don't have the money or the 
> knowledge to fix it, you are perfectly fine with their voice being 
> silenced from the internet?  And you would feel justified in your stance 
> even though you know that you could have prevented this from happening?
> 
> 
> On 11/03/2017 01:20 PM, Daniel Quintiliani wrote:
> > +1. What's next, mandatory logging of all servers for the NSA?
> >
> > Also, I will repeat my last message:
> >
> > We can't force domains we peer with internationally to not host malware 
> > or comply with our definition of "legal" - this is the hosting provider's 
> > job.
> >
> > --
> >
> > -Dan Q
> >
> >
> > On Fri, 3 Nov 2017 01:24:25 +0100, Amunak <amunak AT amunak.net> wrote:
> >
> >> I don't think we should make too many limiting rules. For one, if (when)
> >> OpenNIC grows it'll be impossible to realistically check domains for
> >> legality or even malware and such. And when we do it only when requested
> >> to take down the content, is it really fair? And who gets to decide if
> >> the rules are truly broken? I don't think T2 (or even T1) server owners
> >> should be pressured to do any blocking. If they want to do so, and
> >> disclose it then sure. Especially if it's to follow the laws of their
> >> respective countries or to protect OpenNIC infrastructure. But force
> >> them to do so? Not really. (Just a sidenote: I thought one goals of
> >> OpenNIC was openness, privacy and no censorship - if we don't uphold
> >> these values are we better than ICANN and why do we really exist?)
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --------
> >> You are a member of the OpenNIC Discuss list.
> >> You may unsubscribe by emailing 
> >> discuss-unsubscribe AT lists.opennicproject.org
> 
> 
> --------
> You are a member of the OpenNIC Discuss list. 
> You may unsubscribe by emailing discuss-unsubscribe AT lists.opennicproject.org