Blackout Week Protest

[DomainShield]

Due to a lack of confidence in the future of .au domains I have decided to suspend my drop catching service (as well as new .au domain registrations) until there is more clarity on the future of the .au domains.

The secondary market has been significantly destabilised by the announcement and then subsequent delays in the implementation of direct registrations by auDA.

In recent discussions with auDA I am even more unsure of the future as it seems to me that the Registry Transformation Project and the Policy Review Project are not correctly aligned. Based on my experience as a project manager this will result in either further delays, increased costs or decreased quality.

This protest starts 1 September 2017 and will run until at least until 7 September 2017 when the suspension will be reviewed again.

Please note that we will still operate as an auDA accredited registrar during this period and registrants can still renew and manage their existing domains as per normal.

I do not undertake this protest lightly as I am a small business owner and operator. I literally feed and dress my children on the income from this business.

Anthony Peake

 

[DomainShield]

By the way christmas is coming early.
Christmas.com.au is dropping tomorrow and I am not going to try to catch it... so get in on Drop and Netfleet because who knows what will happen.

 

[snoopy]

Due to a lack of confidence in the future of .au domains I have decided to suspend my drop catching service (as well as new .au domain registrations) until there is more clarity on the future of the .au domains.

The secondary market has been significantly destabilised by the announcement and then subsequent delays in the implementation of direct registrations by auDA.

I support this protest. It is good to see someone to come out and clearly state that .au is destabilising the market (which obviously is the case). This is what happened with .uk and I don't think it ever really recovered. .co.uk is now weaker and the new extension has failed in the marketplace with extremely low volumes being registered.

AUDA's actions & the actions of the prior board have done huge damage to .com.au in my view, initially it was felt in the aftermarket but the effects are going further than that now. Once the UBU situation is resolved I believe it will become clearer that .com.au is likely contracting and the pace of that will likely pick up unless AUDA is willing to scrap the .au proposal.

 

[DomainShield]

I support this protest. It is good to see someone to come out and clearly state that .au is destabilising the market (which obviously is the case). This is what happened with .uk and I don't think it ever really recovered. .co.uk is now weaker and the new extension has failed in the marketplace with extremely low volumes being registered.

AUDA's actions & the actions of the prior board have done huge damage to .com.au in my view, initially it was felt in the aftermarket but the effects are going further than that now. Once the UBU situation is resolved I believe it will become clearer that .com.au is likely contracting and the pace of that will likely pick up unless AUDA is willing to scrap the .au proposal.

Snoopy,
I am protesting against auDA inability to implement agreed change. I am not protesting the decision to implement direct registrations.
It is too late to bother arguing the merits of .au again. So moving past the yes/no direct registration argument, lets start to think about when and how because the longer that takes the more damage is done to the Secondary Market into which domainers and drop catchers have invested time and effort.

 

[DomainNames]

The reason for the delay is certain parties have been called out for putting out pure B.S about the need for another competing .au extension.

When the Deloitte report and CEO say they do not think another .au is warranted of course there will be delays.

We all know Ausregistry, Melbourne IT, Neustar Inc USA, and others in Supply including certain auDA Directors wanted to rush this in to make $$$ from it.

There will be legal issues and auDA and Directors have possible risk ahead.

The shorter .uk and .nz have both failed. This is Fact. They both had been used to justify the shorter .au before years ago. Now the true .uk and .nz registration stats and facts are out it is impossible to justify.

I have no problems debating this with anyone using registration facts and even the announcements from NZ

"NZ fact the .nz has failed and is not "remarkably successful" as claimed
"Figure 3 shows the total number of domain names increased from 640,342 (at 1 April 2015) to 656,607 (at 31 March 2016) – a growth of 16,265, or 2.5 percent. The dip between February and March 2016 reflects the one-year anniversary of the end of the preferential registration and registration period - an important part of the registrations direct at the second level change. It appears that some registrants, having exercised their preferential registration rights, have subsequently let the shorter version of their name drop. "
https://www.dnc.org.nz/sites/default/files/2016-08/Domain Name Commission - Annual Report - .pdf

 

[snoopy]

It is too late to bother arguing the merits of .au again. So moving past the yes/no direct registration argument, lets start to think about when and how because the longer that takes the more damage is done to the Secondary Market into which domainers

I think even AUDA isn't confident on it and the campaign against .au is only just warming up. In my view it is unlikely to happen.

The damage is being done by the proposal itself, needs to be scrapped for the market to have stability.

 

[snoopy]

When the Deloitte report and CEO say they do not think another .au is warranted of course there will be delays.

Yes, the people pushing for it are those who hope to sell new registrations. I think the CEO knows the majority report got it wrong in hindsight (with arguments about the threat of new tlds and the need to follow the UK and New Zealand) and a new extension would be a catastrophe for AUDA.

 

[DomainShield]

The reason for the delay is certain parties have been called out for putting out pure B.S about the need for another competing .au extension.

When the Deloitte report and CEO say they do not think another .au is warranted of course there will be delays.

We all know Ausregistry, Melbourne IT, Neustar Inc USA, and others in Supply including certain auDA Directors wanted to rush this in to make $$$ from it.

There will be legal issues and auDA and Directors have possible risk ahead.

The shorter .uk and .nz have both failed. This is Fact. They both had been used to justify the shorter .au before years ago. Now the true .uk and .nz registration stats and facts are out it is impossible to justify.

I have no problems debating this with anyone using registration facts and even the announcements from NZ

"NZ fact the .nz has failed and is not "remarkably successful" as claimed
"Figure 3 shows the total number of domain names increased from 640,342 (at 1 April 2015) to 656,607 (at 31 March 2016) – a growth of 16,265, or 2.5 percent. The dip between February and March 2016 reflects the one-year anniversary of the end of the preferential registration and registration period - an important part of the registrations direct at the second level change. It appears that some registrants, having exercised their preferential registration rights, have subsequently let the shorter version of their name drop. "
https://www.dnc.org.nz/sites/default/files/2016-08/Domain Name Commission - Annual Report - .pdf

With all due respect you are arguing about something that was decided in 2015 and put to bed in 2016. Just because you don't like the outcome and you have the energy to keep talking about it two years later does not change the outcome. The official decision from the auDA board is that Direct Registration has support from the Board and is to be implemented. I do not think that a report from an accounting firm or the CEO's personal opinion outrank the official auDA Board decision.

I need you to finally accept the outcome of the 2015 Names Panel and subsequent acceptance by the Board. Once that is accepted then it is possible to focus on the effect that dragging this project out for years is having and is going to keep having on investments (large and small) in the .au namespace.

It is highly unlikely that delays are being caused deliberately because of some "BS" you imagine has been called out. It is much more likely that the delay is caused by auDA turning over 80 - 85% of their staff in the last two years. The new staff tasked with implementing Direct Registration policy took a look at the current policies and balked at the prospect of trying to add direct registration policy into the existing 33 policies. So they have proposed a plan to spend 12 months simplifying the policy into 3 distinct policies. Once simplified they can look at adding direct registration policy into the new framework. Once this new simplified policy is ready then... well um then... um okay well um yes but no but well you see but umm yeah look umm yeah ... it will probably take 3 - 4 months to go from completed policy review to fully deployed and live at the registry. This magical registry which can implement undefined .au policy complexity without testing and without even knowing what it is will already have been awarded (most likely on a 4 year contract) to someone starting July 2018 based on a specification which is being finalised and released in the next two days.

As a project manager (in a previous life) I cannot stop thinking out how bad an idea it is to try to replace the Registry before you get the policy sorted out.
It makes me want to scream out "Hey auDA why don't you extend the existing registry contract for 18 - 24 months so you can sort out your policy changes first" or "Hey auDA if you really want to replace the registry then you need to be honest about your policy review and admit that nothing is going to go live until about 2022." or "Hey guys you cannot realistically overhaul policy and kick out the incumbent registry and lose all your staff and annoy all your members and lose your chairman and lose three directors on the board and keep ignoring anyone with experience in the industry and keep ignoring things like reality and still expect to succeed."

Can somebody please call whoever has oversight over auDA and make them put together a bloody 5 year plan because I don't understand why I have to watch the .au aftermarket collapse and my company close down as a result just because they don't actually know where they are going, yet they insist on running ahead at full speed.

 

[robert]

Firstly, I have never taken anything Paul (aka Snoopy) has said on this forum seriously, and when I see him try to tack his agenda of "CANCEL THE DIRECT .AU REGISTRATION" and "CANCEL the ABN REQUIREMENTS" onto the end of everything everyone posts on here, it makes me cringe.

I find both those statements GOING IN THE WRONG DIRECTION and I'm not hearing it from dozens of everyday Australian businesses I speak to on the phone every week.

I find his comments on my own posts, and anyone else who doesn't agree with him, arrogant and holier than though.

The .UK comparison is WEAK and irrelevant until we see what happens after 10th June 2019. And it will take a few years after that. And even then, our system of "first rights" will probably be different, so that makes it even more irrelevant.

Just because "Snoopy" speaks the MOST and the LOUDEST on these forums, doesn't make him right. And I know a lot of people are getting sick of him coming across as though he "represents" the domainer community. Because he does not. He doesn't represent what I think, put it that way.

.COM.AU should never have existed in the first place. It should have been .AU right from the start. We are now dealing with the changeover, and it is, of course, going to be very painful. It always was.

I've been told off in the past for getting personal with this guy, by various people who have somehow been dazzled by him (or scared - but why? weak-sheep?), but I have met him in person now, and I have tried to reverse engineer anything of worth or value he has contributed to the AUSTRALIAN domain name industry, or any sales he has done in the past, or his current domain portfolio and I have tried to give his words credibility... but... I DON'T GET IT?! I don't see anything special there so I won't be wasting any more time there. His arrogant presence on this forum that he is some kind of "domainer god" (small g) is laughable. He has never impressed me, in posts, in person, and I doubt he ever will.

He is 95% negative on the Australian domain name space, on everything auDA... and I've basically had enough of this guy, if you can't already tell. It appears that no matter what happens, he will find something negative to say about it. This is NOT how you create positive change, by bitching and moaning about anything and everything, constantly.

Some people may think this is "too personal" but whatever.. it is what it is. I call a spade a spade. I've given this guy as many chances as I can. Deal with it. Sorry, but I'm not sorry. Moving on.

auDA has been called into line this year. More so than ever before in history. They know domainers have a POWERFUL VOICE. It's now time they were GIVEN A CHANCE to step up. However, this needs to happen quicker than the current snail's pace. But, of course, it can't happen overnight.

I respect Anthony's Domain Shield blackout, but I don't like it one bit. Domain Shield is such an important part of the drop-catching industry and I can fully understand his frustration. As domainers, and even when I speak to normal business owners, EVERYONE I SPEAK TO would PREFER a DIRECT .AU registration - but in the same breath, EVERYONE I SPEAK TO wants to know WHAT THE RULES ARE GOING TO BE . . . RIGHT NOW.

.. add the fact that our one and only wholesale Registry future is ambiguous just makes it all that more unsettling...

All of this ambiguity has been dragging on for FAR TOO LONG and is now past the point of RIDICULOUS. Which is why I can understand Anthony making this strike, or, STATEMENT, if you will. Someone needs to stand up... or this thing will go on until "2022" like Anthony says.

I think this is a pivotal moment and I applaud Anthony for manifesting it.

I have personally put my hand up to be on the new auDA Policy Review Panel and I hope auDA let me be a part of representing the general Australian business community, who I speak to every day. If they do, I will be doing my best to PUSH THINGS FORWARD AT A RAPID PACE, whilst being fair and reasonable and realistic, and respect my place as one peg in the cog, as one member of a cross-section panel, and do all I can to assist in nailing down exactly what the Direct .AU Registration rules are going to be. I'd hope to also represent some positive changes and note some negative rules that need to be omitted, from the current policies.

Enough is enough. The Australian public, and every person in Australia who owns an Australian domain name, or hundreds of them, WANTS TO KNOW WHAT IS HAPPENING AS SOON AS POSSIBLE and WHEN that moment is going to come.

 

[snoopy]

The official decision from the auDA board is that Direct Registration has support from the Board and is to be implemented. I do not think that a report from an accounting firm or the CEO's personal opinion outrank the official auDA Board decision.

Here is why I think there is no genuine mandate to bring in .au

• Most of the arguments from the Names Policy Panel 2015 Majority report have been invalidated in the years since the report.
• Most of the board members who voted for .au have resigned or been sacked.
• The main party pushing for direct registrations, Ausregistry, has not had its contract renewed.

 

[Data Glasses]

LOL Paul has picked on me in the past, I say ban him

 

[DomainShield]

I am going to ignore the hijacking of this thread by parties wanting to rehash the past again.

Can we all try to be civil and keep the conversation relevant. I am keen to hear from anyone who has some comments that are relevant.

I have posted an update on my homepage to explain it in more detail but in summary I have two issues.
1) Variable length registration periods. This has had widespread support for 13 years and Board support for since before I can even remember yet auDA have not implemented it yet. To date they remain uncommitted to a delivery date.
2) Direct registrations. This has majority support since 2015 and official Board Support since 18 April 2016. auDA remain uncommitted to a delivery date.

Delays on Issue 1 are annoying but don't affect enough people at the same time to warrant any action. Delays on Issue 2 have already affected the aftermarket and it is not too long before new registrants start losing confidence as the questions over how and when direct registrations will get implemented go unanswered. This issue is affecting everyone and it is happening now. I want auDA to make some public commitments to delivering these policy changes which is their actual job.

 

[snoopy]

2) Direct registrations. This has majority support since 2015 and official Board Support since 18 April 2016. auDA remain uncommitted to a delivery date.

Delays on Issue 1 are annoying but don't affect enough people at the same time to warrant any action. Delays on Issue 2 have already affected the aftermarket and it is not too long before new registrants start losing confidence as the questions over how and when direct registrations will get implemented go unanswered. This issue is affecting everyone and it is happening now. I want auDA to make some public commitments to delivering these policy changes which is their actual job.

Think you are pushing a barrow that has little support with that.

Agree on the variable length registrations though, no reason for that not to come in.

 

[DomainShield]

Think you are pushing a barrow that has little support with that.

Agree on the variable length registrations though, no reason for that not to come in.

I accept that the wheelbarrow has little support here. On the official records it does however have majority support and more importantly it has auDA Board Support since April 2016.

Everyone knows that variable length registrations are a so called no brainer, there is literally zero resistance and it is seen as a easy change with only positive outcomes for almost everyone (except drop catchers). So ignoring me, drop and Netfleet, lets ask WHY has auDA failed to get this done? It is really important to push for an answer AND it is relevant to issue 2 too because if they cannot deliver on Issue 2 and they drag it out like Issue 1 then the Aftermarket is going to suffer more than necessary.

 

[snoopy]

I accept that the wheelbarrow has little support here. On the official records it does however have majority support and more importantly it has auDA Board Support since April 2016.

It hasn't had board support "since" then, it had the support of the prior supply stacked board. Even then the decision was based on a report that has little validity today because proper data has since come out about new tlds (failure), .uk (failure) and .nz (failure).

Needs to be a vote to invalidate it.

 

[neddy]

With all due respect you are arguing about something that was decided in 2015 and put to bed in 2016. Just because you don't like the outcome and you have the energy to keep talking about it two years later does not change the outcome. The official decision from the auDA board is that Direct Registration has support from the Board and is to be implemented. I do not think that a report from an accounting firm or the CEO's personal opinion outrank the official auDA Board decision.

Anthony, I understand your protest, and I commend you on it. I stopped buying expiring domains because I have no confidence in what auDA is actually going to do when it comes to prior rights if and when direct registrations ever see the light of day. Confidence is key in anything - otherwise we are just gambling.

As a regulator, auDA has an obligation to its members and stakeholders to end this uncertainty one way or the other asap.

However, I'm going to respectfully disagree with you on a number of your assertions in the quote above.

• What was decided in 2015 by the majority of the Names Panel (and accepted by the auDA Board in 2016) was always subject to how direct registrations were to be implemented. There was supposed to be an industry panel to work through this. They would make recommendations; these would go out to public consultation; a final recommendation would be made; the auDA Board would then make a decision. The normal auDA way in other words. This has not happened as yet - and so this has ultimately led to market uncertainty.

• In the 2 years since the NP, lots of circumstances have changed at auDA and with other ccTLD's - this has been written about quite extensively. The auDA CEO has also stated that the registry situation has to be sorted out before direct registrations can be properly considered. Consequently, heels have been dragged (which is your point).

• Boards can and do change decisions if circumstances warrant it. They have an obligation to look after the best interests of the organisation (which includes members and stakeholders). Listen to this audio clip from the AGM in November (around 04:00 through to 06:00). As a recent example, the auDA Board in February resolved not to publish Minutes, Agendas and Reports. We all know what happened next - and the Board subsequently changed their decision.

I didn't believe there was a need for direct registrations 2 years ago; and given recent events, I'm even more convinced of that fact now.

That's my opinion - and we're all entitled to one of those.

Ned

 

[Lemon]

Everyone knows that variable length registrations are a so called no brainer, there is literally zero resistance and it is seen as a easy change with only positive outcomes for almost everyone (except drop catchers). So ignoring me, drop and Netfleet, lets ask WHY has auDA failed to get this done? It is really important to push for an answer AND it is relevant to issue 2 too because if they cannot deliver on Issue 2 and they drag it out like Issue 1 then the Aftermarket is going to suffer more than necessary.

I asked about variable length registrations at the SGM as it has been ignored for too long. The board said it would be 100% implemented with the upcoming registry contract renewal.

 

[DomainShield]

This protest is 100% about the delays and periods of inactivity and not about the decision/s themselves.

If due process is followed and a decision is changed or a deadline has to be moved (with some sort of an excuse given) I think everyone knows I'd simply buy a beer and sit around moaning and groaning about it in a pub all afternoon.

I am aware that the "How" of Direct Registration conversation is starting shortly and I even have an indication of how long it would take, so I was asked today why would I start this protest now when it is about to start moving anyway. My answer is that as long as everyone involved is aware of the consequences of the delay and they do their personal best to not cause any extra delays then I don't want them to even think about it BUT if they cannot honestly put a hand up and say they are moving forward quickly and diligently then I hope it makes them think twice about their actions.

 

[ttfan]

As domainers, and even when I speak to normal business owners, EVERYONE I SPEAK TO would PREFER a DIRECT .AU registration

You must move in different circles to me, because my experience is almost the exact opposite. I'm sure you would the appreciate that the response to such a question depends very much on how you phrase it, and the context you build around it.
Most business owners that I speak to have no clue about it at all, and it's hard to give them a good explanation without colouring it with our personal bias.

 

[snoopy]

This protest is 100% about the delays and periods of inactivity and not about the decision/s themselves.

That's what you'd like it to be about because you hope to push through direct registrations!