auDA announces "Domain Investor Focus Group" without even calling for members

[snoopy]

Direct .AU Registration has been the most polarising issue facing the domainer and domain investor communities since it was publicly approved to go ahead by auDA on the 18th April, 2016,” said Mr Kaay. “In forming the new Domain Investor Working Group, I believe we have a very strong group of 8 members who have been specifically chosen for their extensive experience as well-known and respected professional domain investors.

https://www.auda.org.au/news/focus-...to-direct-registration-implementation-policy/

Given Mr Kaay is one of very few domain investors in favour of direct registration I find this all rather curious,

• Why were participants not publicly call for?
• Who are the 8 people?
• Who chose them?
• Under what selection criteria where these people chosen?

How can this be a "real and meaningful consultation process" when it seems to have been organised in secret?

 

[findtim]

CMWG2

 

[Bacon Farmer]

You get the answers you pay for.

 

[findtim]

DIWG, seriously !

lets see how the PRP ends up? lets see how the DIWG ends up? the CMWG is dead !

whats the common denominator? the "terms of reference" , the ToI's are so tightly written there is no scope to come up with a decision OTHER then the one desired.

THAT is where the CMWG succeeded, yep , it may seem like you lost the war but you won the battle as you actually tried to have a say, you made a crack in the wall, what you bought to light is the way auda is now seen by many to be working with total disregard to any outside input and publicly has stated that's the way it wants to stay.

the DIWG are already off to a bad start stating they are going to help the PRP with implementation of direct reg ! cameron said at the 2106 AGM there would be business case studies? 2 years on and still none, the names panel and then the board at the time made a decision on data that is now "mouldy bread"

the DIWG shouldn't be thinking about domain investors, you are a small % of the owners of australian domain names and thinking about the overall economic effects direct reg would cause, THIS will change domain name investing as businesses will be hesitate to buy.

to enable selling the top 1% of domain names to the determent of 2mil aussie business owners is disgusting and if the DIWG do not implement market research to substantiate the reasoning then behind it then you are in default of the power you have asked for.

they have you BLINDED ! by the word "implementation" , it isn't that ! the word is " viability" and it simply isn't viable.

making profit simply because of someone elses loss is BAD, making $20 profit when someone then has to pay $XXXX to implement is REALLY BAD.

and here we go again ! 2 years on and back to the old subjects !

DIWG, i truly hope you have the balls to find out the truth, i really do.

tim

 

[Bacon Farmer]

Mr Kaay recently had the Vice Chair on his video cast as a special guest.

Was the Vice Chair paid for that appearance or was it a favour I wonder?

It's good to have maaaaates!

 

[sasha]

Dear Wolfpack

All you do is bitch, bitch and then bitch some more. Get a life, do something meaningful and contribute to society

Can't be that hard, can it?

Love Sasha

 

[Bacon Farmer]

Are you a member of the focus group?

 

[sasha]

no, i'm not a member of any group nor was i ever invited to be

 

[Bacon Farmer]

Yeah I feel you. It seems we only talk about auDA.

Can I humbly suggest to all, if you are sick of auDA stuff, start posting on other topics.

 

[sasha]

it be easier if the wolfpack just stop bitching

 

[Bacon Farmer]

They can post stuff, you can post stuff.

Nobody has to read it.

 

[sasha]

why don't you just ring each other and bitch between yourselves in private

 

[Andrew Wright]

Dear Wolfpack

All you do is bitch, bitch and then bitch some more. Get a life, do something meaningful and contribute to society

Can't be that hard, can it?

Love Sasha

Hey Sasha,

Don't like the content of a thread - don't read it.

Can't be that hard, can it?

Andrew
XOXO

 

[findtim]

lie
cheat
steal
manipulate
squander
ignore
deceive
enforce
destroy
burden
threaten

ummm, bitch didn't make the top 10 !

tim

 

[sasha]

Hey Sasha,

Don't like the content of a thread - don't read it.

Can't be that hard, can it?

Andrew
XOXO

wow, a groupthink with a copy and paste, can't be that hard, can it?

XOXO

 

[snoopy]

Video about the members.

The makeup seems reasonable, (not that I agree with the secret method though)

https://domainer.com.au/domainer-show-episode-6/

 

[snoopy]

cameron said at the 2106 AGM there would be business case studies?

This is the big one.

Is auDA really going to try and push this through without a business case study?

 

[Drop.com.au]

This is the big one.
Is auDA really going to try and push this through without a business case study?

I believe this is currently seen as a chicken or egg scenario where it is impractical to create a business case when the proposed implementation model has not been presented making the risk analysis difficult to measure.
It is my understanding that once the PRP makes a recommendation on an implementation model, then the auDA board can request a business case study.
Everyone on the 2015 Names Panel made it clear that their votes of Yes/No where very dependent upon "how". We all want to know the answer to "how" so that some sensible research could be done into the risks and benefits. All the shouting and throwing mud at the Yes/No discussion are not helping. Preemptive discussions about the possible "how"s leaked from the PRP are not helping to get closer either. If the DIWG can give some sensible feedback on what might be a suitable "how" so the PRP can go for a final round of public consultation without the disruptive voice of angry domain investors then we might just get a sensible recommendation sent to the board. At which point they can look at the business case so that they can make an educated decision on this.
- Anthony

 

[Drop.com.au]

DIWG, seriously !

lets see how the PRP ends up? lets see how the DIWG ends up? the CMWG is dead !

What do you mean the CMWG is dead? Has it been officially disbanded or are you making a prediction?

whats the common denominator? the "terms of reference" , the ToI's are so tightly written there is no scope to come up with a decision OTHER then the one desired.

Their terms of reference is to look at the current PRP recommendations just before they go out for the final round of public consultation. They certainly do not have it within their scope to change a Names Panel recommendation which has been accepted by a Board. They will however have a voice into shaping the recommendations which are made public and then presented to the board at the end of the year.

THAT is where the CMWG succeeded, yep , it may seem like you lost the war but you won the battle as you actually tried to have a say, you made a crack in the wall, what you bought to light is the way auda is now seen by many to be working with total disregard to any outside input and publicly has stated that's the way it wants to stay.

I think their aim is to reduce outside manipulation which is different to disregarding outside input. They are currently seeking and taking on board outside inputs from my personal experience. There certainly are focus groups (I know of two at the moment) and they are giving feedback on various policies and recommendations in order to make the PRP successful.

the DIWG are already off to a bad start stating they are going to help the PRP with implementation of direct reg ! cameron said at the 2106 AGM there would be business case studies? 2 years on and still none, the names panel and then the board at the time made a decision on data that is now "mouldy bread"

I believe the business case is coming, it will be done once the PRP makes a recommendation later this year and before the Board makes a decision on it some time next year.

the DIWG shouldn't be thinking about domain investors, you are a small % of the owners of australian domain names and thinking about the overall economic effects direct reg would cause, THIS will change domain name investing as businesses will be hesitate to buy.

The DIWG is thinking about domain investors that is what the DI stands for. auDA called for three or four focus groups. There is already a Registrar Working Group formed and in theory there will be one for businesses too.

to enable selling the top 1% of domain names to the determent of 2mil aussie business owners is disgusting and if the DIWG do not implement market research to substantiate the reasoning then behind it then you are in default of the power you have asked for.

What are you referring to here? DIWG are being asked to speak up for themselves as a focus group they are not responsible for trying to find out what other groups think. There is a separate focus group to focus on that. The whole idea is for them to be focussed and not to make claims on behalf of other groups.

they have you BLINDED ! by the word "implementation" , it isn't that ! the word is " viability" and it simply isn't viable.

You sound like the guy who told Henry Ford that a car was not viable.

making profit simply because of someone elses loss is BAD, making $20 profit when someone then has to pay $XXXX to implement is REALLY BAD.

Making claims without evidence is bad in my opinion. Would you mind explaining to me who is making a $20 profit and who is being forced to pay $XXXX for something with zero benefit. If you happen to be talking about .au then I believe it would be necessary for people to do a Business Case for if they plan to spend the $XXXX to gain some benefit.

and here we go again ! 2 years on and back to the old subjects !

This conversation is about 10 years old and carries on because demand does not go away on its own.

DIWG, i truly hope you have the balls to find out the truth, i really do.

Being sexist is so last decade. Aside from that I do hope they give a concise supported argument for why .com.au holders should get rights and why monetisation is not a bad thing. I like to think of a suitably monetised website as a courtyard leading to a variety of establishments with the possibility of it being eventually owned and developed by one establishment rather than the dead end which an inactive or unregistered domain leads to.
- Anthony

 

[findtim]

I believe this is currently seen as a chicken or egg scenario...............

lets call implementation the chicken and case study the egg, i totally agree, what the danger is that the egg never gets laid !

i watched a show on youtube and it was about the norway fjords

, the first question the asked was " WHY" not "how" , once they established a need ( case studies, economic implications, financial benefits to community etc ) they then worked out HOW, we have it back the front and the difference between WHY and HOW is simply a point of view, a decision to chose one or the other.

HOW is easy, you just flick a switch, how is HOW first? if WHY says its not needed then we can just forget about HOW ! at what point are we going to ask the people concerned and i don't mean domainers i mean the dubbo dentist YES that F**king dentist which is the litmus test for this whole thing, give me any 20 businesses in australia at random to phone and allow cameron and i to speak to them stating our cases and i know who will win, it will be a NO.

NO, thats what everyone is scared of and thats WHY no contact of any cred has been made to the LARGEST domain owner group in australia..... SME's

how on EARTH can we now do a survey? with 950 new members !!!
deloittes report even said it needed a business case
the YES survey !
the manipulated elongated survey !
the names panel with a minority, i hope holly stands up when/if she is around for the direct reg vote.
its almost 2019, the 2015 data is deadddddd , the board that approved it is all but gone, i think joe and grant are the only ones left, erhan has publicly said he wouldn't vote on it.

so, i think they have got it back the front, its clear to me the egg needs to come first

tim