[feedback-report] The limits of ARF, and INCH

[John R. Levine]

> The ARF Draft itself could be changed. Especially part 4-d. We could
> leave it like it is for email abuse and add a non email attachment for
> logfiles and other contents. I see no problem with that.

Don't be silly.  Every current bit of software that reads ARF reports 
expects to find the current three parts, text, formatted text, and 
message.  If you send something different, it doesn't matter whether you 
call it ARF, it won't be ARF because it won't interoperate with existing 
ARF software.  For example, nearly all of the ARF reports I get are in 
fact list removal requests, so my ARF reader mostly looks at the copy of 
the message to get the details of who to remove from what list, and pays 
little attention to the formatted report part.

> But if I interpret the feedback on this list right, I'm not dogmatic
> enough, more pragmatic and more solution driven.

I think you'll find we're quite pragmatic, but we also have a lot of 
experience with attempts to overload message formats, which tells us it's 
a bad idea.

We all agree that it would be nice to have a way to report other kinds of 
abuse that aren't tied to a single e-mail message, but ARF isn't it.

R's,
John