auDA gives 6 days notice of Members Forum

[snoopy]

auDA Management called the date and found the forum location not the CMWG.

There we have it. Don't trust any auDA statements at the moment.

CMWG issues highlighted of concern raised;
1. Short notice of meeting notice.
2. Lack of materials of the proposed new auDA membership models being ready for the CMWG and members.
3. CMWG want it live streamed at the forum so people who cannot make it can join in.
4. We want the information of the proposed models made available on the auDA website in advance of the meeting for members to be able to review.
5. CMWG wanted the ability for people to read the materials and send in question on notice so the answers also could be prepared to save time at the forum and not fob off anyone.
6. The issue of membership stacking has been raised ( auDA media release rejecting it as expected).

The answers back;
1. Have the forum at this date and gain feedback from members.
2. CMWG to try and gain more information on CIRA model. auDA had said they would assist directly with their contacts at CIRA but it has fallen back to the CMWG now.

It sounds like all the problems are coming from auDA management yet they blame it on the CMWG. Since auDA claim it is the CMWG organising the event they should have no issues with members getting proper notice (i.e. a month, not 6 days) and materials being given.

I have made it very clear to the CMWG and auDA I will not be rubber stamping things without proper process, accountability and transparency. It was said to me " will you agree with it be listed as unanimous etc". I said no if I I did not agree with something I want it on the record as an abstain or vote against.

It was/ my intention for this to really work but it is not being done right, poor communications., lack of materials etc etc. It is very time consuming every week to devote time to this and lock out other business.

They'll try and not publish any dissenting opinions, that is how things operate at auDA at the moment.

 

[Bacon Farmer]

Do you seriously think that any model other than the functional constituency (auDA's preferred method of retaining control) will get up?

C'mon, they are playing lip service and the managed discussion and CMWG forum is just a sham.

Hands up if you'd heard of a functional constituency before it was suggested by the cabal in charge. No?

You are being managed by professionals to the outcome they want.

 

[snoopy]

Do you seriously think that any model other than the functional constituency (auDA's preferred method of retaining control) will get up?

C'mon, they are playing lip service and the managed discussion and CMWG forum is just a sham.

Hands up if you'd heard of a functional constituency before it was suggested by the cabal in charge. No?

You are being managed by professionals to the outcome they want.

Agree, it looks to me like auDA controls the CMWG (Cameron is in every meeting chairing it & giving instructions and what they can and can't do) and through branch stacking hundreds of sham foreign memberships auDA now control the member vote.

If you read this,

Although we are chaired by the CEO of auDA, Cameron Boardman, our mission is not to advance the agenda of auDA management.

https://auda.org.au/mailouts/auDA+P...ction+to+the+Consultation+Model+Working+Group

The real meaning is,

Chaired by the CEO of auDA, Cameron Boardman, our mission is to advance the agenda of auDA management.

If auDA were genuine they would not have put CEO in as chair, they would have put in a "independent" chair. In reality they control everything then cover it over with cladding of "members" so they can claim to the government the are ticking boxes from the review.

 

[DomainNames]

Agree, it looks to me like auDA controls the CMWG (Cameron is in every meeting chairing it & giving instructions and what they can and can't do) and through branch stacking hundreds of sham foreign memberships auDA now control the member vote.

If you read this,
The real meaning is,
If auDA were genuine they would not have put CEO in as chair, they would have put in a "independent" chair. In reality they control everything then cover it over with cladding of "members" so they can claim to the government the are ticking boxes from the review.

"If auDA were genuine they would not have put CEO in as chair, they would have put in a "independent" chair."
I agree 100%

auDA PRP
auDA CRC
auDA CMWG
... Nothing changes under current auDA management, Have no doubts they are behind the scenes at all of these and the CMWG goes 1 step further with the auDA CEO directly chairing the CMWG.

The CMWG are still waiting for the copies of the letters etc the auDA CEO said he and Chris Leptos has been sending out inviting selected parties ( such as Supply) to stack the current membership model by signing up their staff in bulk to Demand class... Improved Accountability and Transparency after the Government review.... Laughable.

 

[Bacon Farmer]

I'm sure Cheyne could supply (pun intended) his copy.

 

[snoopy]

The CMWG are still waiting for the copies of the letters etc the auDA CEO said he and Chris Leptos has been sending out inviting selected parties ( such as Supply) to stack the current membership model by signing up their staff in bulk to Demand class...

Watch as they make every excuse under the sun as to why they can't produce that letter.

 

[joshrowe]

Watch as they make every excuse under the sun as to why they can't produce that letter.

The shredder ate it.

 

[Scott.L]

Watch as they make every excuse under the sun as to why they can't produce that letter.

I assume its all in the minutes;

In fact, auDA on 25 May 2018 released its policy on preparing and publishing minutes. I'm sure auDA will comply with their own policy and publish the minutes of the CMWG, right?

Surely they aren't lying about their commitment to publish minutes; yet, I do not see minutes from the CMWG or the auDA Board Committees published online as per their policy. Are they mincing words again?


auDA's Publication of Minutes Policy

Note the Box in Red is just for Board Minutes - therefore, where are all the Committee and Panel Minutes?

especially note point (6)
.

 

[DomainNames]

I assume its all in the minutes;

In fact, auDA on 25 May 2018 released its policy on preparing and publishing minutes. I'm sure auDA will comply with their own policy and publish the minutes of the CMWG, right?

Surely they aren't lying about their commitment to publish minutes; yet, I do not see minutes from the CMWG or the auDA Board Committees published online as per their policy. Are they mincing words again?

View attachment 990
auDA's Publication of Minutes Policy

Note the Box in Red is just for Board Minutes - therefore, where are all the Committee and Panel Minutes?

especially note point (6)
.

At the direction / suggestion of auDA Management who has been auDA CMWG at the first CMWG meeting we where told no minutes are being kept or recorded.

 

[Scott.L]

Do you see How they twist everything. Why publicly publish this statement to include non-published minutes?

The Bloody heading states Publication of Minutes;

It should state; Preparation and Publication of Board Minutes, and save us all from their forked tongue.

 

[Scott.L]

At the direction / suggestion of auDA Management who has been auDA CMWG at the first CMWG meeting we where told no minutes are being kept or recorded.

Typical - it was created by the Board, its a body corporate entity, and its got NO MINUTES?

 

[DomainNames]

Reminder: CMWG Membership Model Consultation – Monday 2 July

28 June 2018
The auDA Consultation Model Working Group’s member consultation event takes place next Monday, 2 July.

The CMWG is keen to see all auDA members take part and have their say on the future of auDA.

Monday, 2 July 2018 from 4:00 pm to 7:00 pm (AEST)
La Trobe University, City Campus
Room 2.15, Level 2 | 360 Collins Street | Melbourne, VIC 3000
Register to attend in person

Agenda
Download the agenda for the event.

Online participation
If you can’t make it to the event in-person you’ll be able to participate in the consultation online via a Zoom webinar.

Register in advance for the webinar here:

https://zoom.us/webinar/register/WN_CP4qnN1JRQahIswD3Te-Xw

After registering, you will receive a confirmation email containing information about joining the webinar.

Live polling
Live polling will also take place during the webinar using sli.do. Instructions for using this will be given during the introduction to the event.

Before the event
The CMWG asks that ahead of the event members read the following documents to better inform discussion and feedback.

• Review of the .au Domain Administration
  The Department of Communications and the Arts’ final report of their review into auDA. This report contains the 29 recommendations auDA needs to implement.
• Potential membership models for discussion
  A broad outline of three potential membership models to serve as discussion starters

Questions on notice
Members wishing to submit questions on notice or suggestions for membership models to the CMWG please email engagement@auda.org.au or via a post to the members' discussion forum.

Join the auDA members’ discussion forum
The CMWG encourages all auDA members to take part in the online discussion about the future of auDA in the members’ forum.

https://memberportal.auda.org.au/t/potential-membership-models-to-consider/225

If you’re an auDA member who wishes to join the forum please email engagement@auda.org.au
​

 

[DomainNames]

I hope auDA Management are not paying outside people to put together things like this? ??
Why and how much are they paying them?
Design by Creative Order https://www.creative-order.com.au

It is a very cheap and simple job a junior person at auDA to do themselves using MailChimp or someone on www.Fiverr.com etc

Cut your expenses and waste auDA Management! Lower your fees and wholesale pricing for Supply and .au domain name Consumers to benefit from.

 

[Scott.L]

The Working Group will not be advising on the specifics of any proposed changes to auDA’s Constitution or operations as recommended by the Department’s report.

I doubt the 'working group' has any knowledge about auDA's plans to change the constitution, so no point asking.

.

 

[Scott.L]

Questions taken from auDA's "ThinkPlace" Agenda.

What is it that people value about auDA membership? Why?
Its for Australians.

What would we like to emphasise in any new membership structure? Why?
That all members are Australian.

What would we like to see included any new membership structure? Why?
Non-Board approval of applicants.

 

[DomainNames]

Questions taken from auDA's "ThinkPlace" Agenda.

What is it that people value about auDA membership? Why?
Its for Australians.

What would we like to emphasise in any new membership structure? Why?
That all members are Australian.

What would we like to see included any new membership structure? Why?
Non-Board approval of applicants.

Please email this and other good feedback info to;
engagement@auda.org.au
attention CMWG / auDA / Board

 

[findtim]

What would we like to see included ( IN) ? [ is that a typo? ] any new membership structure? Why?
Non-Board approval of applicants.

i'll be at the meeting and i am interested in everything that has been said to date, i have read it all, so scott can you just expand this so i don't get it wrong.

i can read your answer in so many different ways.
thanks
tim

 

[Scott.L]

i'll be at the meeting and i am interested in everything that has been said to date, i have read it all, so scott can you just expand this so i don't get it wrong.

i can read your answer in so many different ways.
thanks
tim

Non-Board = 'membership committee' delegated to approve applicants. [Not given to the Board to decide]

 

[DomainNames]

Non-Board = 'membership committee' delegated to approve applicants. [Not given to the Board to decide]

Scott you know a lot. Please make sure you submit materials now to the CMWG about membership models, why stacking is bad ( some of them don't know why), and questions in advance of the forum.

 

[Bacon Farmer]

Why a functional constituency is a flawed model:

The system can be gamed to give minor stake holders more leverage.

The larger stake holder groups such as the public will be represented by groups that may for example take a dim view of monetisation. This can then be used as a bargaining tool by other groups. Trading votes. Then you get a Pauline controlling key issues.

Key issues should be decided by individuals not vested interest groups playing politics.

Say no to politicians running auDA.