auDA Board Elections
- Thread starter DomainNames
- Start date
Just one last thing I'd like to say regarding the results (and this isn't about domainers per se) is that it's a shame that small business isn't really represented.
If you think about it of the 2.2 million domains registered, probably 2.15 million domains are registered to SMEs
However the election results have
Kartic - Works for MelbourneIT, a considerably sized company by any measure
George - Works for Ausregistry - again a largeish company (of course George does have plenty of small biz experience in a former life)
Josh - Works for Australia Post
Paul - Ex VP of ICANN holding board positions at many major companies.
Not taking away from the obvious quality of any of these directors but I think this is a real pity as most of the other candidates were from small business...
If you think about it of the 2.2 million domains registered, probably 2.15 million domains are registered to SMEs
However the election results have
Kartic - Works for MelbourneIT, a considerably sized company by any measure
George - Works for Ausregistry - again a largeish company (of course George does have plenty of small biz experience in a former life)
Josh - Works for Australia Post
Paul - Ex VP of ICANN holding board positions at many major companies.
Not taking away from the obvious quality of any of these directors but I think this is a real pity as most of the other candidates were from small business...
DomainNames
Top Contributor
EVERY domain name registrant should be allowed to vote free. Only then will results truly reflect a proper election process.
Imagine in Australia with population of say 20 million the result was concluded on only votes from 1000 paying members of a " citizen club" (approx 2 million domain names and only 100 votes is a good comparison isnt it?
Why is the election a closed shop? Thats not a true democratic process is it?
many more candidates and voters probably have a lot to offer the .au namespace but they are totally unaware of Auda , the Board and how to vote etc. Maybe some people want it to stay that way?? The report was done 5 years ago and its doubtful much has changed as very few members exist still and voted even though auDA has spent a lot on advertising in the major newspapers as recent as yesterday promoting themselves with large colour advertisements.
http://www.auda.org.au/about/surveys/ "about ¾ of SME’s using the internet are not yet aware of the Australian Domain Name Administrator."
•SME's Awareness and Understanding of auDA, December 2006
This report contains results from a brief telephone survey of 800 SME's undertaken by Nexus Research in late November 2006. The survey was undertaken to measure current levels of awareness of auDA and understanding of its activities.
Last edited:
Cooper Mills DomainLawyer
Top Contributor
David that is why I ran for election and will continue to run again, I have a lot of experience with Small Business. In all of my dealings in the Panels I have always advocated the concerns of small business.
I encourage all DNTrade members to become members of auDA and get involved in the Panels. Unfortunately there is a real lack of understanding of the needs of small business.
Using the monetisation policy as an example, a small business who owns shoes.com.au can only sell shoes but not handbags and belts on the website without being in breach of policy. Really dumb hey?! The auDA Board voted to maintain this restriction, go figure!
Shane
Top Contributor
But remember that most SMEs will have very different views to domainers.
I have a few mates who run small (and not-so-small) businesses, and I can tell you that they don't like domainers one bit!
Don't get me wrong, as capitalists they begrudgingly respect the fact that we make money from domain names, but they'd love nothing more than for the monetisation rules to be abolished and to have a strictly enforced requirement that all domain owners must be running a business with a close and substantial connection to the name.
Over the years I've convinced a few of them to buy premium names in the aftermarket, and after handing over a few grand (or more) they'll tell me "this is ****ed that these ****s can register domains that they have nothing to do with".
They say that because a) they don't understand the rules, and b) they hate paying out money (even though they know it's worth it).
So just be careful what you wish for, because 99% of domain owners who are not domainers (i.e. business owners) aren't exactly cheering for us!
David Goldstein
Top Contributor
The above discussion just shows how stupid it is to oppose registrations at the second level.
Once they were introduced as I have earlier outlined in a possible transition period, you could tighten registrations for the existing 2LDs to benefit small business with existing registrations grandfathered.
It would be a win-win-win. Everyone would prefer shorter domains, less regulation, and for small business, there would be the option to register in existing 2LDs with rules designed to benefit small business.
As for small business, or any business, I asked at the last two Names Policy Panel meetings for more consultation to do be done with large business, but it didn't happen. It's difficult.
As for elections, very few are interested regardless, even members of auDA often don't care. I don't see it as a big issue that auDA has a low profile as I suspect this to be the case for every ccTLD registry/policy body. It's not that auDA shouldn't do some work to raise it's profile, which it has done, but in reality, people don't care unless something goes wrong.
Once they were introduced as I have earlier outlined in a possible transition period, you could tighten registrations for the existing 2LDs to benefit small business with existing registrations grandfathered.
It would be a win-win-win. Everyone would prefer shorter domains, less regulation, and for small business, there would be the option to register in existing 2LDs with rules designed to benefit small business.
As for small business, or any business, I asked at the last two Names Policy Panel meetings for more consultation to do be done with large business, but it didn't happen. It's difficult.
As for elections, very few are interested regardless, even members of auDA often don't care. I don't see it as a big issue that auDA has a low profile as I suspect this to be the case for every ccTLD registry/policy body. It's not that auDA shouldn't do some work to raise it's profile, which it has done, but in reality, people don't care unless something goes wrong.
Is there a +1,000,000 button?
I deal with registrants all day, every day - if you read any of the Whirlpool threads about domainers, that would be pretty representative of what I hear.
DomainNames
Top Contributor
Something has been going wrong for 11 years! Thats why many here wanted more change with new people allowed to be involved. There is still problems that need addressing so hopefully the successful old candidatese realise now more than ever are they and auDA under scrutiny for change and action.
Many serious issues have been raised and now many have come to light its evident the next election may see some new faces on the board. People may have been successful in clinging to their long standing roles but lets see next election now some have more knoowledge how the "campaining" for election and voting system works.
Just to remind a few here who often forget Fairfax Media is the biggest domainer in Australia with over 30,000 + domain names. There are a lot fo domainers auDA and the board does not seem to know exist also tens of thousands of people in Australia buy domain names for investment purposes every year. By definition most would be " domainers"
in Australia auDA could be replaced by another organisation if the Government so chooses. The "contract" to administer the .au namespace is not forever. Its not a sure thing they will exist as administrators of the .au namespace forever. They must be seen to listen to people and follow proper procedures, expenditure etc etc. YES they do great job but they must listen and work within their charter .
Was the budget approved at the agm. http://www.auda.org.au/about/budget/ did anyone raise concerns of any auDA expenditure items at all? Total Expenditure $4,084,012 are hundreds of auDA branded hats and expensive advertising in major national newspapers celebrating " 25 years of .au" necessary items? .... Travel expenditure of $350,000 for the year seems a little high doesnt it or is Kevin Rudd working as a " consultant" for auDA now ? What about using skype? Voice conferencing to cut some "travel expenditure" costs? Cant the internet help in reducing travel costs....?
Over the years expenditure keeps growing.... some expenditure items seem a waste of money. Dont forget 1 man ran the whole .au name space for free years ago... yes times change but PLEASE lets keep an eye on where the money is being spent and what needs changing within auDA, the board and policy. Its not an easy job they do but it is a " non profit industry
organisation"
Many of the same questions are being asked of Icann http://www.icannwatch.org/mission.shtml http://www.icannwatch.org/icann4beginners.shtml
Last edited:
DomainNames
Top Contributor
Ideas for .auDA voting procedures some here might know if these work or not?
Icann seem to do online voting for the last 11 years? http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/icann-pr21sep00.htm
http://www.icann.org/en/committees/at-large/at-large.htm
http://members.icann.org/
http://members.icann.org/about_at_large.htm
About ICANN's At Large Membership Program
ICANN�s At Large Membership program is a new way for Internet users from all over the globe to participate directly in the ICANN process. The At Large Membership program is an experiment, giving interested individuals a means to be informed about and connected to the policymaking structure for the Internet's domain name and numbering systems.
From February 25 to July 31, 2000, ICANN's membership drive was overwhelmingly successful-- over 158,000 individuals applied for At Large membership. Of those, 76,000 activated their memberships by the September 8 deadline. For details on the membership registration drive, see ICANN's July 31 announcement. For membership application statistics, click here.
The At Large Members of ICANN will be participating in a historic first -- a worldwide online election to choose Directors for the Internet�s private-sector technical coordinating body. The basic rules and schedule for this year's At Large elections were determined by the ICANN Board at its July meetings in Yokohama, Japan.
The nominations process is now complete, with 27 total nominees in the five regions. A set of 18 individuals was nominated by the Nominating Committee, and an additional 9 individuals met the requirements for member-nomination. Since September 9, the nominees have been participating in a voter education and dialogue process, including an online Question & Answer Forum.
The secure online voting site is now open, until October 10 (midnight GMT/UTC). An activated member can cast her/his vote by providing her/his member number, password and PIN. Vote now!
Online voting system (powered by election.com)
Information on the nominees
Question & Answer Forum
FAQ
Following the conclusion of the 2000 At Large membership election in November, ICANN will initiate an open, comprehensive study of the At Large membership structures and processes. The study will be open to the participation of organizations and individuals worldwide.
At the same time, any interested individual (including both At Large members and non-members) is invited to take part in ICANN's open, transparent, and bottom-up policy development process through the three specialized Supporting Organizations: the Domain Name Supporting Organization, the Address Supporting Organization, and the Protocol Supporting Organization.
Thanks to a grant from the Markle Foundation, the initial launch of ICANN�s At Large Membership program has been funded without the need for membership dues.
About ICANN
The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) is a technical coordination body for the Internet. Created in October 1998 by a broad coalition of the Internet's business, technical, academic, and user communities, ICANN is assuming responsibility for a set of technical functions previously performed under U.S. government contract by IANA and other groups.
Specifically, ICANN coordinates the assignment of the following identifiers that must be globally unique for the Internet to function:
Internet domain names
IP address numbers
protocol parameter and port numbers
In addition, ICANN coordinates the stable operation of the Internet's root server system.
As a non-profit, private-sector corporation, ICANN is dedicated to preserving the operational stability of the Internet; to promoting competition; to achieving broad representation of global Internet communities; and to developing policy through private-sector, bottom-up, consensus-based means. ICANN welcomes the participation of any interested Internet user, business, or organization. See http://www.icann.org.
For more background about what ICANN does and how it does it, click here.
http://www.icann.org/en/accountability/overview-en.htm http://www.icann.org/en/reviews/affirmation/atrt-final-recommendations-31dec10-en.pdf ICANN Accountability & Transparency http://www.icann.org/en/reviews/affirmation/atrt-final-recommendations-31dec10-en.pdf
Icann seem to do online voting for the last 11 years? http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/icann-pr21sep00.htm
http://www.icann.org/en/committees/at-large/at-large.htm
http://members.icann.org/
http://members.icann.org/about_at_large.htm
About ICANN's At Large Membership Program
ICANN�s At Large Membership program is a new way for Internet users from all over the globe to participate directly in the ICANN process. The At Large Membership program is an experiment, giving interested individuals a means to be informed about and connected to the policymaking structure for the Internet's domain name and numbering systems.
From February 25 to July 31, 2000, ICANN's membership drive was overwhelmingly successful-- over 158,000 individuals applied for At Large membership. Of those, 76,000 activated their memberships by the September 8 deadline. For details on the membership registration drive, see ICANN's July 31 announcement. For membership application statistics, click here.
The At Large Members of ICANN will be participating in a historic first -- a worldwide online election to choose Directors for the Internet�s private-sector technical coordinating body. The basic rules and schedule for this year's At Large elections were determined by the ICANN Board at its July meetings in Yokohama, Japan.
The nominations process is now complete, with 27 total nominees in the five regions. A set of 18 individuals was nominated by the Nominating Committee, and an additional 9 individuals met the requirements for member-nomination. Since September 9, the nominees have been participating in a voter education and dialogue process, including an online Question & Answer Forum.
The secure online voting site is now open, until October 10 (midnight GMT/UTC). An activated member can cast her/his vote by providing her/his member number, password and PIN. Vote now!
Online voting system (powered by election.com)
Information on the nominees
Question & Answer Forum
FAQ
Following the conclusion of the 2000 At Large membership election in November, ICANN will initiate an open, comprehensive study of the At Large membership structures and processes. The study will be open to the participation of organizations and individuals worldwide.
At the same time, any interested individual (including both At Large members and non-members) is invited to take part in ICANN's open, transparent, and bottom-up policy development process through the three specialized Supporting Organizations: the Domain Name Supporting Organization, the Address Supporting Organization, and the Protocol Supporting Organization.
Thanks to a grant from the Markle Foundation, the initial launch of ICANN�s At Large Membership program has been funded without the need for membership dues.
About ICANN
The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) is a technical coordination body for the Internet. Created in October 1998 by a broad coalition of the Internet's business, technical, academic, and user communities, ICANN is assuming responsibility for a set of technical functions previously performed under U.S. government contract by IANA and other groups.
Specifically, ICANN coordinates the assignment of the following identifiers that must be globally unique for the Internet to function:
Internet domain names
IP address numbers
protocol parameter and port numbers
In addition, ICANN coordinates the stable operation of the Internet's root server system.
As a non-profit, private-sector corporation, ICANN is dedicated to preserving the operational stability of the Internet; to promoting competition; to achieving broad representation of global Internet communities; and to developing policy through private-sector, bottom-up, consensus-based means. ICANN welcomes the participation of any interested Internet user, business, or organization. See http://www.icann.org.
For more background about what ICANN does and how it does it, click here.
http://www.icann.org/en/accountability/overview-en.htm http://www.icann.org/en/reviews/affirmation/atrt-final-recommendations-31dec10-en.pdf ICANN Accountability & Transparency http://www.icann.org/en/reviews/affirmation/atrt-final-recommendations-31dec10-en.pdf
Last edited:
DomainNames
Top Contributor
http://www.icann.org/en/ombudsman/ Could auDA use this also? should an auDA ombudsman be set up?
What is an Ombudsman?
An ombudsman (conventional English plural: ombudsmen) is a person who acts as a trusted intermediary between an organization and some internal or external constituency while representing not only but mostly the broad scope of constituent interests. An indigenous Danish, Norwegian, and Swedish term, Ombudsman is etymologically rooted in the Old Norse word umboðsmaðr, essentially meaning "representative". An ombudsman is an official, usually appointed by the government or by parliament, who is charged with representing the interests of the public by investigating and addressing complaints reported by individual citizens. Modern variations of this term include "ombuds", "ombudsperson", or "ombudswoman". (Thanks to Wikipedia)
What is the ICANN Ombudsman and what does he do for you?
•He is independent, impartial, and neutral;
•A reviewer of facts;
•An investigator of complaints about unfairness;
•An ADR practitioner
The ICANN Ombudsman has jurisdiction over complaints about:
•Things done (or not done) by one or more members of ICANN staff Board or an ICANN constituent body.
•Things done (or not done) by the Board of Directors which may be inconsistent with the Articles or the Bylaws.
The Ombudsman does not have the power to make, change or set aside a policy, administrative or Board decision, act, or omission. The Ombudsman does have the power to investigate these events, and to use ADR technique to resolve them.
What is an Ombudsman?
An ombudsman (conventional English plural: ombudsmen) is a person who acts as a trusted intermediary between an organization and some internal or external constituency while representing not only but mostly the broad scope of constituent interests. An indigenous Danish, Norwegian, and Swedish term, Ombudsman is etymologically rooted in the Old Norse word umboðsmaðr, essentially meaning "representative". An ombudsman is an official, usually appointed by the government or by parliament, who is charged with representing the interests of the public by investigating and addressing complaints reported by individual citizens. Modern variations of this term include "ombuds", "ombudsperson", or "ombudswoman". (Thanks to Wikipedia)
What is the ICANN Ombudsman and what does he do for you?
•He is independent, impartial, and neutral;
•A reviewer of facts;
•An investigator of complaints about unfairness;
•An ADR practitioner
The ICANN Ombudsman has jurisdiction over complaints about:
•Things done (or not done) by one or more members of ICANN staff Board or an ICANN constituent body.
•Things done (or not done) by the Board of Directors which may be inconsistent with the Articles or the Bylaws.
The Ombudsman does not have the power to make, change or set aside a policy, administrative or Board decision, act, or omission. The Ombudsman does have the power to investigate these events, and to use ADR technique to resolve them.
- Independence
[*]Impartiality;
[*]Confidentiality;
[*]Professionalism;
[*]Respect for Diversity;
[*]Excellence in Ombudsmanship;
Last edited:
neddy
Top Contributor
The Commonwealth Ombudsman was forced to resign today .............
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...robity-of-office/story-fn59niix-1226171783664
Just goes to show that even an Ombudsman can stuff up sometimes.
neddy
Top Contributor
I've been meanining to reply to this for days. Excellent observations Shane.
I posted something on Flying Solo about the 6 month rule being abolished and got some vitriolic responses from a few people! Even from a web designer.
http://www.flyingsolo.com.au/forums/talking-technology/16320-auda-abolishes-6-month-rule.html
Luckily there were a few supporters .........
joshrowe
Top Contributor
I won't speak for other auDA board members' business experience. However, I have 5 years experience running a small business in the Australian domain name industry. I am on record standing up for small businesses too - http://www.zdnet.com.au/controversy-erupts-over-melbourne-it-termination-notice-120269002.htm as well as my efforts in fighting against domain name slammers (which preyed on small businesses) - http://www.google.com.au/search?gcx=w&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8&q=domain+name+slammers+josh+rowe
In my current role with a blue chip company I spend a lot of my time understanding the needs of small businesses as important customers of that blue chip company. This gives me another perspective on small businesses. In particular I understand that many small businesses do not have time to be getting across every policy and industry issue in detail and do need "help" from industry advocates to get changes through which will benefit their business.
Additionally, I am about to leave my current corporate role to head up a small business. However, I can't divulge the details right now.
I hope this brings some comfort to DNT readers that I can bring some valuable experience and understanding of small and medium sized businesses to the auDA board.
Erhan, If you continue to post mis-truths I will continue to correct them (which may become very repetitive and monotonous for DNT readers). I suggest you focus your efforts on being constructive and consultative with auDA. It sounds like you're still in election mode.
To repeat an earlier comment I made - http://www.dntrade.com.au/candidate-questions-t3822.html?p=26528#post26528
As far as changing the policy goes, this is NOT actually something the auDA board does. Policy is changed through advisory panels which are formed by those in the industry. The board's role is to select the advisory panel members, set the terms of reference for the panel, have the panel seek public input, review the panel's (consensus) recommendations and respond to those recommendations.
It would be extraordinary for the auDA board to argue to accept a minority report (such as the recent one) when the report had NOT been seen by the public NOR had consensus agreement from the industry representative panel.
The board made the following comments regarding the minority report:
auDA Board Meeting Minutes - August 2011 said:
My advice and encouragement to Erhan et al regarding seeking changes regarding the monetisation policy is to continue engaging through the policy panels AND ensure there is also industry support (panel members & public) for those changes.
That's exciting regarding the new business - is it related to domains? Best of luck with it anyway.
Do you really think the last policy panel was a success? Here's a summary (disagree if you wish):
Once every three years the Names Policy Panel meets to discuss major issues regarding domain names.
It costs auDA (domain registrants) hundreds of thousands of dollars in terms of travel costs, marketing, admin & wages etc.
From the last panel after 9 months+ of work, hundreds of unpaid hours of panelists' time the ONLY accepted meaningful recommendation that wasn't just rehashing definitions was...
wait for it...
...we relax some restrictions on the failed id.au extention.
How long would a business last if every three years that's the sum of any fundamental changes made?
Do you really think the last policy panel was a success? Here's a summary (disagree if you wish):
Once every three years the Names Policy Panel meets to discuss major issues regarding domain names.
It costs auDA (domain registrants) hundreds of thousands of dollars in terms of travel costs, marketing, admin & wages etc.
From the last panel after 9 months+ of work, hundreds of unpaid hours of panelists' time the ONLY accepted meaningful recommendation that wasn't just rehashing definitions was...
wait for it...
...we relax some restrictions on the failed id.au extention.
How long would a business last if every three years that's the sum of any fundamental changes made?
DomainNames
Top Contributor
Hi Josh and any other who may know. Josh in your early campaign emails posted here you raised a question of legitimate voting and conflicts of interest etc.
1. Did any votes for the Board member election get counted from companies ( or their staff) who provide paid services to auDA?
2. Could there be any conflict of interest in auDA accepting those votes? Should those companies be allowed to vote?
3. For example would or should a law firm, it server company, advertising, consulting, travel firm, news writer etc etc be who provided paid services to auDA ( or board members) be allowed to vote? Could they in anyway vote for people who could then give them any financial or other benefit for their vote? there could be potential conflicts if those service providers voted couldnt there?
4. Who would look at this issue ( obviously auDA and the Board could not as it would a conflict of interest) and then should there be a re count ?
5. is there a need for an auDA Ombudsman using the same framework as the Icann Ombudsman? http://www.icann.org/en/ombudsman/ www.icannombudsman.org/
1. Did any votes for the Board member election get counted from companies ( or their staff) who provide paid services to auDA?
2. Could there be any conflict of interest in auDA accepting those votes? Should those companies be allowed to vote?
3. For example would or should a law firm, it server company, advertising, consulting, travel firm, news writer etc etc be who provided paid services to auDA ( or board members) be allowed to vote? Could they in anyway vote for people who could then give them any financial or other benefit for their vote? there could be potential conflicts if those service providers voted couldnt there?
4. Who would look at this issue ( obviously auDA and the Board could not as it would a conflict of interest) and then should there be a re count ?
5. is there a need for an auDA Ombudsman using the same framework as the Icann Ombudsman? http://www.icann.org/en/ombudsman/ www.icannombudsman.org/
Last edited:
Cooper Mills DomainLawyer
Top Contributor
I am glad to hear that Josh, but you have previously said on your own website and this forum that 'I am a staunch consumer advocate.'
On another note, good luck in your new business venture!
Josh I disagree that my comment on the policy issue is a mistruth, I have taken that example out of auDA Policy. I respect the fact that you may not agree with me, but I have more day to day experience with auDA Policy than most people.
On that point the auDA Board sets the terms of reference and appoints the panel members and a large number of board members are also on the panel!!! With respect to the minority report, there are some important points that need to be made:
(a) The board did not properly respond to the report - your quote of the minutes of meeting prove that;
(b) As I have previously said, even if the board didn't want to accept the minority report, the board could have referred it to a working group to provide more input on;
I am one of the most constructive and consultative people, your comments suggest that I am otherwise. If someone holds a different view to the 'auDA establishment' then you are suggesting they are not constructive, or more recently that they are conspiracy theorists.
I will continue to speak out against bad policy in a constructive manner, like I always have. You and I are not likely to agree on a lot of issues, but that is what makes a robust debate.
To be constructive I have run for and will continue to run for the board even though the goal posts always change when I run - that way I can ensure that I keep accountability of what is being done in the .au space.
DomainNames
Top Contributor
joshrowe
Top Contributor
It's an online business, but not related to domains (except for using one to promote the web site of course). I'll let DNT members know once it's up and running.
It depends on what your definition of success is - how would you define success?
A successful names policy panel, in my opinion, is one that properly considers all the relevant issues, seeks public & industry input, acts on that input and puts forward proposals to the auDA board for changes.
Domainers who are seeking domain monetisation policy changes may be frustrated that the minority panel views have not been actioned. However, my encouragement to those who wish to continue the constructive lobbying is to understand the broader industry needs (think about the other types of people who were on the panel) and how the proposed monetisation policy changes might affect their stakeholders. With broader industry support for policy changes, achieving consensus on the panel is more likely.
The official (press release) summary of the panel outcomes was:
from: http://www.auda.org.au/news-archive/auda-30082011/
auDA Press Release said:
Last edited:
joshrowe
Top Contributor
Having a commercial business focus and being a consumer advocate are not mutually exclusive. In fact, those who understand the needs of consumers best usually win the highest market share. Just ask Apple.
Thanks!
For clarification, the part of your original statement I disagreed with was that "The auDA Board voted to maintain this restriction".
There was no names policy panel consensus recommendation to remove "this restriction", so to suggest the board "voted to maintain this restriction" is simply false.
As I have said previously, it would be extraordinary for the auDA board to argue to accept a minority report (such as the recent one) when the report had NOT been seen by the public NOR had consensus agreement from the industry representative panel.
I believe that the establishment of a Domainers Industry Association will give more weight to the individual views which are being put forward. It could provide a mechanism to lobby other key stakeholders in the industry to garner support for the types of policy changes which domainers are seeking.
There were 4 auDA board members on the 21 member policy panel.
Last time I checked auDA board members do not all think alike either. The 4 auDA board members on the panel were from demand class (me), supply class (x2) and independent (1).
What kind of response did you expect ?
I encourage you and others who wish to effect policy change to go broader in the "industry" to seek more support for the changes you seek. That does not mean the approach to date has been useless, it just needs to be built on to be successful.
That is incorrect on both accounts.
My intent is not to lock horns with you. More so, it is to provide DNT members with an understanding of how policy change comes about. If that requires me to provide clarifications on statements that you (or others) make then I think that's more than appropriate.
Good luck!
However, as I have said a number of times before - policy change happens through recommendations from policy panels. The best chance of success is to achieve public & industry support for policy changes.
When will the Domainer's Industry Association be set up? How will it engage with the broader industry to garner support for the key policy changes?
What do you mean by this?
Good luck (again) !
joshrowe
Top Contributor
There are auDA members which auDA pays for services.
For the AGM which has just occurred, I don't know which auDA members voted and for who.
There is a specific item in the auDA constution which prohibits voting agreements.
from: http://www.auda.org.au/about/constitution/#_Toc445827236
auDA Constitution said:
If you have evidence of a specific issue, then I strongly suggest you put it in writing to the auDA Chairman.
If you are not comfortable with writing to the auDA Chairman, then you may wish to write to the Government.
Are there any issues which the existing mechanisms have not been able to handle?
Last edited:
