neddy
Top Contributor
I'm afraid I have to admit partial failure in my mission to get someone from auDA to interact with us on this forum in regards
to any queries on policy.
In particular, the vexed question of "Domain Monetisation" - which many domain owners new and old are still confused by.
I have made several email requests, and had a couple of phone conversations with them about the benefits to all concerned.
After all, part of their role is education and explaining policy interpretations.
This was my first email to Jo Lim - Chief Operations and Policy Officer:
Today I was informed by email that they decline to do so. They outlined a number of reasons - most of which I believe were a
"cop out". I told them this on the phone today during a frank but friendly phone conversation.
Their attitude is that:
grey seems to be the preferred colour.
They also gave other reasons, but out of courtesy, I do not publish those.
Moving forward .................
We will get there in the end. This is even more reason for non-members of auDA to become members of auDA.
to any queries on policy.
In particular, the vexed question of "Domain Monetisation" - which many domain owners new and old are still confused by.
I have made several email requests, and had a couple of phone conversations with them about the benefits to all concerned.
After all, part of their role is education and explaining policy interpretations.
This was my first email to Jo Lim - Chief Operations and Policy Officer:
Hi Jo,
Nice to talk to you again today.
As discussed, could you please come back to me with regards auDA contributing
to an “Ask auDA” sub-forum on DN Trade. I just think this would be so productive
an exercise for all concerned.
One of auDA’s roles is education – and there a lot of domainer’s (including myself)
who need education on some matters. 95% of us want to try and do the right thing,
but if we are ever in doubt what is correct policy, who do we ask?
No one is trying to hang auDA out to dry – we just want to be able to ask a reasonable
question, and get a reasonable answer.
I totally understand that in this day and age that if you did give answers to general
questions you would have to give disclaimers; e.g. that circumstances may vary on
each particular case etc. But that is really easy to spell out.
From our part, we would state that any post made in the “Ask auDA” column would
have to be general in nature (and that no specific domain names are to be mentioned).
We need a conduit Jo – whether it be that you blog yourself on auDA’s site and allow
comments and questions – or whether we have a controlled and moderated thread on
DN Trade. Lawyer’s can ask The Law Society for advice, accountant’s also have a body –
you get the picture.
I’m sure it could work!
Kind regards, Ned
DN Trade
Today I was informed by email that they decline to do so. They outlined a number of reasons - most of which I believe were a
"cop out". I told them this on the phone today during a frank but friendly phone conversation.
Their attitude is that:
My answer to that was that when we do phone it is hard to get a definitive answer. Not many things are black or white -
grey seems to be the preferred colour.
They also gave other reasons, but out of courtesy, I do not publish those.
Moving forward .................
- Jo Lim has committed to writing an article on auDA's blog about "domain monetisation" within the next 4 weeks. Hopefully they
will open their comments section to allow questions! - If any domain owner has a question on policy, they should email it to: info@auda.org.au. (Don't phone - get it in writing!).
They are standing by for your email. - Please also post any questions on this forum so we can also formally channel these through to auDA.
We will get there in the end. This is even more reason for non-members of auDA to become members of auDA.
Last edited:
