This should be researched I guess.

My understanding is that ISPs take abuse seriously, they can't really afford
not to and it's easy enough for them to do. The research would be provided
by the charter holder and simply double-checked by the ISP staff. The ISP
deals in volume so cutting off one customer is too small a number to have an
impact on revenue. The poster would then have to get an entirely new account
with a different ISP. I would think this would be good motivation for not
screwing around.

In fact I would be inclined to think that it would be resolved in the formal
warning phase.


I'm missing a couple of pages from this chapter. Notice that the most
outrageous
flamers, and some of the most prolific pot stirrers, hide behind phony screen
names, phony (not just munged) e-mail addresses, etc. How do you report
to anybody?

Requiring that everybody post with a real name and a real e-mail address would
go a long way toward curing the underlying problem. Not because they would be
reportable, but because a good number of these people would think twice about
some of the statements they make if they were actually identifiable with their
posts.

But such a requirement involves rules, rules demand a judge, etc. If anybody
can report anybody else to an ISP for posts they aren't pleased with, I'd hate
to say it but the ISP's will be busy for weeks listening to people from
rec.boats whine about one another.