This is pretty much all you need to konw...
"Hi Sam, I sent you an email containing my latest post on auDA because as a journalist I always like to know both sides to any story I cover and figured you'd feel the same. I sent it to a range of people and posted it on LinkedIn. I was acting on my own behalf having presumed you would be fed the story. I have disclosed my relationships (in the article I sent you and in previous comments on this site). Being an interested party does not diminish the facts I present any more than the other party who gave you the yarn. This is from what I sent you yesterday: "POSTSCRIPT: Late today auDA announced that demand class director Tim Connell has resigned. Mr Connell says he doesn’t support what auDA describes as the “majority position of admitting new members in line with the auDA Constitution and the requirements of the federal government review”. While Mr Connell is certainly entitled to his viewpoint, at the recent Special General Meeting auDA’s top-tier legal firm, Ashurst, confirmed that the provisions of the Constitution do not allow the board to reject the new members. auDA has three months (“or such longer period as the Board may otherwise resolve”) to appoint a replacement for Mr Connell." In defence of the auDA board members, some of whom are long standing friends, even if some people question the fact that new members have joined in large number, given the rules applying under the Constitution you can't reasonably attack the directors for taking the legal advice they received."
