findtim
Top Contributor
WHY? because thats the way the "self-regulatory, non independant acting totalitarianism" organisation wants it.
tim
AUDA membership made easy
- Thread starter findtim
- Start date
tim
Shane
Top Contributor
There is a massive under-representation of end users, but the question for all of us is why would 99% of end users who have one or two domains for their business feel the need to join?
I have plenty of friends in business, and very few of them have any real interest in domain names aside from paying the renewal every two years. I don't think I'd be able to talk a single one of them into joining.
Of course their domain name is incredibly important to their business, but if I look at my own businesses, there are plenty of other important factors and I haven't joined the various associations or authorities for each of those things.
If every time a person registered or renewed an AU domain name they were presented with an easy tick-box option to include auDA membership for $22 a year (along with some bullet points on why they should join), how many do you think would tick that box? Honestly I think it would be minuscule.
So yes I would certainly love to have more end-users as auDA members, and I think all end-users with more than a couple of domains should be joining, but I don't think it's going to happen for many of them besides the big guys like realestate.com.au and carsales.com.au etc.
Maybe the whole system needs to be reviewed? Maybe all domain name owners should be given a vote on demand directors? Of course most would not bother to vote, but we'd certainly get more voting power than we currently have.
Bacon Farmer
Top Contributor
I agree.
All domain owners should get automatic membership - like the Canadian model.
And the different classes of membership abolished.
All domain owners should get automatic membership - like the Canadian model.
And the different classes of membership abolished.
findtim
Top Contributor
its true, i try hard to have my clients join and give them personal good reasons to
eg
ne of my clients is a photographer who just has her name janedoe.com.au , can you believe it but there is another photographer named janedoe who owns the .net.au !!! what are the odds?
i have another whos business name is a brandable and business name registered by other businesses in EVERY state of australia eg: classiccars.com.au , so hopefully the .au threat will push him over the edge? etcccccc
i also believe that in general everyday there seems to be no point for them to be members, but when something like this happens i believe its ridiculous how many hoops they have to jump through to get a vote, more so even knowing they can vote !
so i just email them all because one day they will get my invoice and say WTF? and at least i can say "i told you"
why does canada work? or does it? is it just member numbers and no action?
tim
eg
ne of my clients is a photographer who just has her name janedoe.com.au , can you believe it but there is another photographer named janedoe who owns the .net.au !!! what are the odds?i have another whos business name is a brandable and business name registered by other businesses in EVERY state of australia eg: classiccars.com.au , so hopefully the .au threat will push him over the edge? etcccccc
i also believe that in general everyday there seems to be no point for them to be members, but when something like this happens i believe its ridiculous how many hoops they have to jump through to get a vote, more so even knowing they can vote !
that would help i think if it was supported by notifications from auda.
so i just email them all because one day they will get my invoice and say WTF? and at least i can say "i told you"
why does canada work? or does it? is it just member numbers and no action?
tim
Cooper Mills DomainLawyer
Top Contributor
Erhan, you are to be commended for your past efforts. In fact, not many people on here would know that you tried year after year to get elected as a Demand Class Director, and were just pipped on the post time after time. Very frustrating it was for all of us! Conspiracy theories abounded.
Also, you were on the previous Names Panel - and even were part of a minority report back then! You fought the good fight for all of us.
Then you switched tack, and got elected first time around as a Supply Class Director. (Only about 28 +/- members in Supply, as opposed to about 125 members in Demand). Smart move.
So while you have never answered this question on here, I guess it is fair to assume that you would have to support direct registrations given that you represent Supply? It would probably be electoral suicide if you didn't.
Having said that, I do know how adamant you are about the implementation discussion being handled properly - and that is a big comfort to me and others.
Thanks Ned
Decisions I take are not based on what will be popular amongst people who voted for me, but what is in the best interests of auDA. This is my obligation as a Director at law. It is very different to public office.
With the issue of direct registrations, it has been approved, the focus should now be on a model for implementation. I would love to hear from everyone on this issue. Everyone should come along to the 7 June drinks that we are having in Melbourne. I hope to get up to Sydney and Brisbane too. As you say the implementation is very important, that is why we need everyone to be active in the discussion so that groups like domainers can put forward solid submissions.
I think that everyone will soon see that the auDA board under Stuart Benjamin's leadership has started a transformation of auDA, this will become evident through this year and you will be pleased! Even small things like online membership applications have started to roll out.
Cooper Mills DomainLawyer
Top Contributor
As I said before, be careful what you wish for. If everyone was a member then I would put money on the fact that domaining would be prohibited as would monetisation...
DomainNames
Top Contributor
Why? In Canada where membership is free domaining is standard as is monetisation.....
There is no need for Auda to charge for membership. They have $ millions in the bank and are supposed to be a not for profit
DomainNames
Top Contributor
Membership Auda needs to follow this FREE membership model; https://cira.ca/membership
Election https://cira.ca/election
Conflict of Interest https://cira.ca/sites/default/files/attachment/policies/cira-code-of-conduct.pdf
DomainNames
Top Contributor
https://cira.ca/marketplace $1.99 .CA domains!
How much is Auda, Ausregistry, registrars, resellers planning to sell the new .AU for, what cost models have they put together already?
What will justify any price for the .au if it could easily be given to existing .com.au owners without any costs to Auda, registry, registrars etc?
How much is Auda, Ausregistry, registrars, resellers planning to sell the new .AU for, what cost models have they put together already?
What will justify any price for the .au if it could easily be given to existing .com.au owners without any costs to Auda, registry, registrars etc?
findtim
Top Contributor
.uk is 99p first year !
i've been wondering since canada was mentioned how they afford to do it for free and maintain some level of quality?
why call them members at all? why not the registration of a domain name let you get a vote if you so wish.
it would seem silly that you can register a domain name BUT if you want to have a say then auda check you out???
having 1000'sssssssssss of members would soon sap up a lot of $$$, i'd ike to see auda spend time and money on more communication with domain owners rather then processing free memberships where nobody takes part in anything.
as has been said elsewhere its hard to get clients to join, wipe that application red tap along with the membership $$ and you have a chance of getting more involvement. auda doesn't need 150 x $22 each year !!!, all that BS for $3k p/a
as for careful what you wish for, i think there would be a lot of non involvement then new found rule changing protests.
tim
i've been wondering since canada was mentioned how they afford to do it for free and maintain some level of quality?
why call them members at all? why not the registration of a domain name let you get a vote if you so wish.
it would seem silly that you can register a domain name BUT if you want to have a say then auda check you out???
having 1000'sssssssssss of members would soon sap up a lot of $$$, i'd ike to see auda spend time and money on more communication with domain owners rather then processing free memberships where nobody takes part in anything.
as has been said elsewhere its hard to get clients to join, wipe that application red tap along with the membership $$ and you have a chance of getting more involvement. auda doesn't need 150 x $22 each year !!!, all that BS for $3k p/a
as for careful what you wish for, i think there would be a lot of non involvement then new found rule changing protests.
tim
neddy
Top Contributor
You can quite correctly quote your obligations as a Director now - however, you were not appointed; you were elected in a competitive environment. This was effectively your candidate statement back in 2014.
None of us on here are silly Erhan. We know you are a Supply Class Director, and you have to represent your constituency. That's the reality (which I can accept). You keep trying to divert the issue of where you stand by saying it's a done deal, and let's all just get on with it.
(I do often wonder though how things would have been had you been successful in being elected as a Demand Class Director).
Many people on here like you and respect you (and some of us are even your clients); however, I'm sure I speak for a number of people when I say that we need to support two Demand Class candidates who will represent us as domainers and domain investors. That's why it's great to see someone of the calibre of Shane Moore signal his intent, and so eloquently set out what he stands for (if elected).
snoopy
Top Contributor
If that is the role of directors then it is a pretty big problem in my view, i.e. voting in someone to "further AUDA's interest". The problem being that AUDA exists to administer in the *public interest*, not in its own interests. AUDA doesn't exist to make money or help registrars make money.
Given that the Internet naming system is a public resource in the sense that its functions must be administered in the public or common interest, auDA recognises that the management and administration of the au ccTLD are subject to the ultimate authority of the Commonwealth of Australia
https://www.auda.org.au/pdf/auda-govt-endorse.pdf
snoopy
Top Contributor
I hope whoever gets elected on the demand side pushes for .au to be scrapped. Fair enough to talk about implementation idea but the issue of conflicts on interest and lack of proper communication with registrants should be getting brought up in my view. It is convenient for all those to voted yes to say "it is a done deal, let's move on". Actually it is not a done deal, it is a done deal the day names start resolving. Until then I'd say it is a live issue.
Cooper Mills DomainLawyer
Top Contributor
auDA doesnt make decisions on the basis of how much money it will make, it doesn't need the money, just take a look at the annual report. Your comment suggests that your two points are mutually exclusive, that is not the case.
Cooper Mills DomainLawyer
Top Contributor
You can quite correctly quote your obligations as a Director now - however, you were not appointed; you were elected in a competitive environment. This was effectively your candidate statement back in 2014.
None of us on here are silly Erhan. We know you are a Supply Class Director, and you have to represent your constituency. That's the reality (which I can accept). You keep trying to divert the issue of where you stand by saying it's a done deal, and let's all just get on with it.
(I do often wonder though how things would have been had you been successful in being elected as a Demand Class Director).
Many people on here like you and respect you (and some of us are even your clients); however, I'm sure I speak for a number of people when I say that we need to support two Demand Class candidates who will represent us as domainers and domain investors. That's why it's great to see someone of the calibre of Shane Moore signal his intent, and so eloquently set out what he stands for (if elected).
Ned if you read my 2014 statement, it sets out achievements and a track record, it doesn't say that I will change the world or that I will do what I can do allow Registrars to make more money etc. It is a totally consistent position. The people who vote for me need to know what I have achieved, I stand on my record.
I am not diverting any issues, I along with yourself have been two of the biggest advocates for a discussion on direct registrations. That is a good thing. Just look at my posts on DnTrade I am talking about the issue all the time. I don't run away and hide, I am happy to engage with people, even if we dont agree on everything, that is why I love DnTrade. We all grow as people when we share our knowledge and experiences.
You need to remember that I have a portfolio of domains, so I will be impacted more than most people on DnTrade with direct registrations. I am focusing on getting people to think about what implementation should look like, we need to come up with ideas and get members of this forum to make a submission. Also many people on DNTrade know that I am in contact with them to listen to their concerns, and see what I can do to help, even though they cant vote for me at election time (I listen to all stakeholders not just Supply class).
As for candidates, both Simon Johnson and Stuart Benjamin (current Chairman) have been very strong Demand Class Directors. I have seen Simon get smacked around on this forum and that is because he cant comment on a lot of his work due to confidentiality. What i can say is that as a domain investor I would want both of those guys on the board, they do a lot behind the scenes. The current board has implemented some major changes which will become obvious over time and I think everyone here will be pleased.
I get the sense that the whole election discussion is not solely about the best interests of domainers, but rather an opportunity to punish existing Directors for accepting the recommendations of the Names Policy Panel. If that is the motivation I can understand it, but it is best to call a spade a spade.
neddy
Top Contributor
Lots of organisations / people don't need more money, but it never seems to stop them accepting it if there is an available source.
Remember my "Follow The Money" article on Domainer.com.au? The registry and the registrars are the ones pushing for direct registrations. And you are one of their representatives on the Board. [/QUOTE]
Ok, so where do you stand on them? That's all we want you to say. Then cards are on the table, and we can all play them accordingly.
We don't know what existing Directors think or how they voted because no one wants to tell us anything! So are you now saying that all Directors accepted the recommendations of the (majority) Names Panel Report?
Stuart Benjamin and Simon Johnson are good guys. It's not a case of punishing them at all. Simply, why should anyone on here vote for them again if we don't know where they stand on issues that are important to us? And there has never been anything more important to us than direct registrations - and the impact they may have on us. Do we have to wait until they put their candidate statement's out in September / October?
Last edited:
findtim
Top Contributor
thats never been my view, my beef is the other 1.7 million owners that still don't know anything about it, thats where you will get your real answer.
don't forget many of us are acting for current clients and also people we have sold to so they can protect their investment and not just our own portfolios.
the "decision is made" is a major reason for our promotion of the persons who best represent us ( whoever that may be) as is the case with any election.
but this isn't a NF blind bid, whoever whats the job tells where they stand.
tim
snoopy
Top Contributor
Erhan, can you explain what voting in the "best interests of auDA" means? The best interests of AUDA shouldn't be of any concern, as long as they have enough funding to do their role.
The balance sheet cash amount of $10million, is a indication of everything that is wrong with that organisation. Instead of "empire building" they should be holding up their obligation to the public and reducing their fees. I have no idea idea what they charge per registration (because they seem to like to hide that), but whatever it is, it is clearly too high.
neddy
Top Contributor
$3.85 inclusive of GST per registration - https://www.auda.org.au/industry-information/registrars/registrar-accreditation/
I covered this on "Follow The Money".
