2017 Board Elections

[Cheyne]

michael jordan ( part version )
"I can accept failure, everyone fails at something. But I can't accept not trying.

Some people want it to happen, some wish it would happen, others make it happen.

I've failed over and over and over again in my life and that is why I succeed."

Motivational quotes are great but when somebody is elected to the board who winds up being arrested for corruption, theft, or fraud, you'll be looking back on this wondering why we didn't conduct the proper due diligence on the people who we elected.

Perhaps ASIC's approach is more palatable:

Can anyone be a director or secretary?
You must not act as a director or secretary (or manage a company) without court consent if you:

• are an undischarged bankrupt
• are subject to a personal insolvency agreement or an arrangement under Part X of the Bankruptcy Act 1966 (Bankruptcy Act) that has not been fully complied with
• are subject to a composition under Part X of the Bankruptcy Act and final payment has not been made, or
• have been convicted of various offences such as fraud or offences under company law, such as a breach of your duties as a director or insolvent trading. If you have been convicted of one of these offences you must not manage a company within five years of your conviction. If imprisoned for one of these offences, you must not manage a company within five years after your release from prison.

If you become bankrupt, enter into a personal insolvency agreement or are convicted of a relevant offence at a time when you’re a director or secretary then you automatically lose that office. The company must then notify ASIC that you’re no longer a director or secretary of the company. For more information, see Information Sheet 14 Bankruptcy and personal insolvency agreements (INFO 14).

 

[snoopy]

Perhaps ASIC's approach is more palatable:

Can anyone be a director or secretary?

You must not act as a director or secretary (or manage a company) without court consent if you:

• are an undischarged bankrupt

That would be the situation today for AUDA & is how I have seen it always work.

You can join the Australian Parliament if you were bankrupt in the past, you can be the Prime Minister. What Simon is proposing is absolutely absurd, I'v never seen anything like it.

I wonder if Simon's rules came in how many other directors would need to resign & how many members he'd be able to kick out?

 

[findtim]

Can anyone be a director or secretary?

i totally agree, maybe you should read it again, i am NOT here to go to bat for ned but i am here to go to bat for the future consequences of such a resolution being placed carte blanche.

I feel the proposed text is far too broad in some of its definitions

this is the real sentence i am concerned about and you point it out correctly.

Motivational quotes are great but when somebody is elected to the board who winds up being arrested for corruption

the past doesn't always tell the future, do you have a crystal ball for bill crosby, harvey weinstein , rolf harris, bill clinton, richard nixon, shall i keep going?

better the evil you know the evil you don't, i have met people whilst in this industry that i wouldn't turn my back on in a fully lit room with security cameras on !!!!
who do i want with to associate with? someone i KNOW and not a back stabber, i like my attacks to come from the front.

tim

 

[snoopy]

Another thought: Is Simon's proposal even legally valid? Has AUDA had legal advice on the discriminatory effects of it?

 

[Cheyne]

i totally agree, maybe you should read it again, i am NOT here to go to bat for ned but i am here to go to bat for the future consequences of such a resolution being placed carte blanche.

What you quoted was not a question I was asking, it was a direct piece from the ASIC web site.
http://asic.gov.au/for-business/run...officeholder-duties/your-company-and-the-law/

the past doesn't always tell the future

So why do we have a sex offenders register? According to you they've done their time and paid their dues, why should they not be allowed to live near children?

It's because depending on which study you read between 43 and 60% of adults who are released from prison are convicted of another crime within 15 years, most within the first 5 years.

I think the risk is too high and needs to be mitigated somehow.

Note: I do not know nor have I ever met Simon, Ned, or yourself. My comments are based on my opinion of what I believe is good governance and practice.

 

[snoopy]

Out of interest one of the other contenders, Craig, co-founder of VentraIP posted on Domainer of being bankrupt in the past (I commend him for posting). I suspect if Simon's proposal got voted in it would pretty much give Lemon a default seat because his 2 out of 3 of his strongest appointments would be out leaving only Nicole and 1 other against him. So Lemon would likely get 2nd place even with a very low vote tally.

https://www.domainer.com.au/dirty-tricks-campaign/#comment-4575

If 2 out 5 demand nominees have already stated this then there is probably other already sitting directors who would be caught out by this crazy resolution and little doubt it would also result in more "AUDA appointed directors" to fill in the gaps.

In my view a high chunk of business owners have probably been bankrupt at some point in their life, this would be different to the corporate type people who have never run a business.

 

[Cheyne]

Out of interest one of the other contenders, Craig, co-founder of VentraIP posted on Domainer of being bankrupt in the past (I commend him for posting).

I wasn't going to bring this up, but now that you have I will say this.

I have known Craig since 1994. We went to high school together. We have run businesses together. I am friends with his parents, his siblings, his wife. I am Godfather to two of his children. You get the picture.

Yet despite all of this I still hold the view that I have explained above and that is not to be detrimental to Craig (or Ned for that matter), but because of what has happened to other organisations in the past where this minimal vetting and due diligence has not been conducted.

If you had asked me any time prior to 2008 if I thought Craig would ever declare bankruptcy I probably would have laughed at you, he would have too, but by his own admission he made poor judgements and subsequently found himself in a dark hole. And if you asked me now if I thought that Craig would ever declare bankruptcy again in his life I will probably laugh at you, he probably will too, but without that fabled crystal ball it is impossible to know for certain.

Known all of this, I hope my previous posts on this issue clearly shows that no matter what my affiliation is to somebody I will not shape what I believe to be my best judgement to fit the narrative. Truth be told, I hold more objection to some of the things that both Craig and Ned are standing for then I do their bankruptcy status, but I still believe some filters need to be in place for Directors but not what Simon is proposing.

 

[DomainNames]

How did this seemingly occur?
https://www.righttoknow.org.au/request/au_historical_financial_irregula

Where is the focus, discussions on actual possible real auDA related issues?

1. How much money is involved?
2. What are the consequences for the finances and reputation of auDA and the trust in the management of the .au name space by auDA for so many years?
3. Why have auDA members been kept in the dark?
4. How long have certain people know about this?
   
5. What else is there we have not been told?
6. Is it accountable and transparent that people only find out about this via FOI's and even then we await to see if the answers are provided... or censored and not provided.. Let's see.
7. This is real auDA money. Real .au domain name consumer money...
8. Did it get paid back by anyone or how can it be avoided again?
9. auDA already have audits etc over the years and everyone was singing off at the AGM every year blindly on the accounts it seems?
   
10. Was anyone referred to to the Police? Or is it not really an issue at that level?
    
11. Did ASIC, ATO do any investigations yet themselves?
12. Is this a Commonwealth issue as aUDA's role falls under the Commonwealth? https://www.afp.gov.au/contact-us/report-commonwealth-crime

If Ned and Nicole get onto the auDA Board I think we could be fairly assured they they try to their best efforts to not only do everything financially right themselves but also perhaps they are 2 of the few who even care about the paying .au domain name registrants consumers rights and interests.

 

[Andrew Wright]

@Cheyne I'm finding it hard to reconcile your previous comments regarding Craig with your latest position. All respect and kudos to Craig for his post on Domainer.com.au, but there appears to be a double standard here on your part. Do you support the exclusion of Craig Marchant from joining the AUDA Board?

1. Who cares that Simon flew business class? Good on him. I fly business class all the time and I would expect nothing less for the representative of auDA at the ICANN conference to be comfortable during their travels. We sent Craig Marchant to the ICANN conference and he flew business class and stayed at the $1,200 per night conference hotel too. This whole mentality of "auDA must not spend money" is backwards and counter-intuitive to making .au a globally respected brand.

2. Craig Marchant resigned from his position at VentraIP Australia back in September which means he no longer represents our businesses, plus he has never been a director or shareholder which I believe allows him to represent the demand class.

I support the exclusion of those with a criminal conviction and those who are or have been bankrupt.

Vetting of board members is commonplace, especially in the NFP space.
At some point in their lives these people have made poor life choices that has landed them in that position. People with these marks on their record struggle to get a credit card even after "time served", so I don't see how there is any justification for them to be able to be elected to a board where they will be responsible for high-level decision making.

You are not the only one who has been Bankrupt before
I have the dubious honour of joining you in that regard. But I try not to let it define me if people want to throw it in your face, it’s their problem, not yours.
What I would say is this, we need people to “Try” in our world – because it’s the only way mankind as a whole can progress and move forward. Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose.
Craig Marchant- https://www.domainer.com.au/dirty-tricks-campaign/#comment-4575

 

[Craig Marchant]

Good evening all,

Apologies for not coming online sooner, I'm up in Newcastle seeing my Gran who has heart failure and MS.

Before we begin, yes I was nominated for Demand class director, and I did think long and hard before throwing my hat into the ring. Why not supply? I'm not actively involved with any organisation at the moment, as I finished up with VentraIP/Synergy/Zuver about two months ago now (September 8 to be precise).

So as most know, I have indeed been bankrupt before. It's not where I wanted to be, but hey, those are the breaks. Hindsight is fantastic, if only it could be used at the time before you make a mistake.

I'm not going to hide behind it or try and make light of it. Yep, that was a stuff up. But, at the same time, I got back up and kept on going. You live, and you learn, and I would also suggest everybody has a skeleton in the closet if they are honest with themselves.

I've always known my financial skills are not perfect, but that is why I don't often stray into those areas of business where others are far more qualified than me. I am more than confident however that I can listen and make an intelligent decision when required. I am, however, and I honestly don't give a hoot if it's blowing my own trumpet or not; I am exceptionally good technically speaking.

More than three quarters (maybe more) of Synergy's technical systems were built by myself to give an indication. I suck at frontend, so I never strayed into that. I also created some other critical software systems for VentraIP and Zuver eventually. I was in charge of networking, hardware, software including the operating system and cpanel configuration, etc.

I also happened to head over to ICANN60 last week for the AGM and enjoyed myself. Policy-wise, I had a ball - and I discovered something I didn't realise about myself, I appreciate it immensely. Ask anybody around the office, how often I had a gange (see: whinge) about how the policy was not designed well from a technical aspect and gaping holes were in the system for somebody to work around. I could see why the policy existed, but because the proper professional people were not consulted (and I think the only real people who can comment from a technical implementation aspect are those poor souls who have to implement it). I was to help bridge that because I understand and see both sides of the coin.

So now, instead of sitting back and harping on about it - I'm going to get involved and help. Both auDA and ICANN orientated because I believe both systems have their benefits and drawbacks. And they go hand in hand.

I agree with the part where there should be some vetting of board members because at the end of the day we are dealing with the general public, and it affects our namespace and reputation. But if we were to take Simon's entire proposal verbatim, holy heck a lot of people who might be able to make a worthwhile contribution are going to be sidelined - and that includes me as well.

The members are the ones who will decide who sits on the board of auDA. If I end up there, that's great. If not, that is also just fine. As I have voiced to both Ned and Nicole previously, and I will now iterate in public, I would still support whoever gets in there to try and repair things.

I am not arrogant enough to feel that I know it all, far from it. I am always learning, and I encouraged my team (past tense) always to give it a go. I would much rather they gave it a go (with some understanding of the consequences) then just sit back and pass it up the food chain. It teaches them nothing just to fix it and send back a one-liner 'done'. What happens when a technical issue is escalated all the way up to me? I don't always have the answer, but with trusty Google and a healthy dose of scepticism and caution along with using what I know to get the job done. That is the same attitude I will have going into auDA board if elected.

I'm happy to answer any questions or queries, just please keep in mind I may be a tad slow for the next few days as I deal with the family crisis.

Thanks everyone.

 

[Cheyne]

I'm finding it hard to reconcile your previous comments regarding Craig with your latest position.

Unsure how, I thought I was pretty clear...

Known all of this, I hope my previous posts on this issue clearly shows that no matter what my affiliation is to somebody I will not shape what I believe to be my best judgement to fit the narrative. Truth be told, I hold more objection to some of the things that both Craig and Ned are standing for then I do their bankruptcy status, but I still believe some filters need to be in place for Directors but not what Simon is proposing.

Let me know if there is something that I haven't been clear about.

 

[Andrew Wright]

Unsure how, I thought I was pretty clear...

Let me know if there is something that I haven't been clear about.

Evasive, Do you support the "exclusion" of Craig Marchant from running for office for the AUDA Board? Yes or no?

 

[Bacon Farmer]

Comparing sex offenders or the recidivist rates of criminals is a misguided comparison to errors in finance.

To suggest such is pretty fcking poor.

 

[Cheyne]

Evasive, Do you support the exclusion of Craig Marchant from joining the AUDA Board? Yes or no?

Let me try and clarify for you.

I said that I believe that there should be some form of vetting for who can and cannot be board members, even if that precludes Craig, Ned, or anybody else from being elected, but I do not support the wording that Simon has used in his proposed amendments. That is why I posted the ASIC requirements for company directors as it seems more fair and reasoned, and those requirements would not exclude Craig or Ned.

When I made my comments on this matter I knew full well Craig's status regarding bankruptcy, but as I explained, it did not alter my opinion just because we are friends. At the time I was unaware of Ned's bankruptcy status as I only learned about that today.

Irrespective, there are things that both Craig and Ned stand for that I do not personally agree with, and on that basis more so than any other I do not support them. But who I personally support is irrelevant since I am not a demand member anyway. Why? I'm not a supporter of those who own registrars being demand members as it feels to me like having an each way bet.

 

[Cheyne]

Comparing sex offenders or the recidivist rates of criminals is a misguided comparison to errors in finance.

I completely agree with you. 100%. But with the way Simon's amendment is worded, "has been convicted of an offence" means any criminal conviction, and as I have said six times now, I do not support Simon's wording.

 

[findtim]

I'm up in Newcastle seeing my Gran

got your proprieties right mate .
thanks for posting.
tim

 

[findtim]

OK, so you've all forced me to do it ! below is a story !
-------------
here's how i see the history, its not new news and it doesn't have to be true it just needs to be how i see it, you pick how you see it but don't debate me on it please, there is a moral at the end.

i only found out about auda in 2010 even though i was happy go lucky since 2001, then i got it ALL, auda, dnt, drop, nf all in half an hour ! you can look back and see i TOOK IT ON.

i was there when ned sold dnt to chris and some people started taking the piss on dnt, i copped a lot of flak as a moderator and rightly so in hindsight ( i thought i was helping ) , i went to my first auda xmas party in ? 2012 and what a ball that was, i was TOTALLY snubbed by chris disspain and CLO which gave me a horrible feeling of the org and what it was about.

i must have made some noise on dnt because simon rang me in his bid to get on the board, honestly me first thought was ANYONE other then those snobs, so i backed him, at the time i think erhan was switching from demand to supply ? i didn't pay much attention to that, dnt was on a roll, we had a set of meetups in melb, syd and bris which i attended each one and met loads of people which has created bonds to this very day. the knowledge exchange i think was at its peak.

so, simon gets on the board back in 2014 after MANY attempts previously , that is the era of massive change in the org, its the lead up to chris D leaving

2015 elections we get grant and miguel on the demand board, i hardly recall much talk about the election, the names panel in 2015 and miguel amongst others all leave ? we have a revolving door of the board. then going forward the passing of chris disspain, the entry of cameron, the stuart shift, micheala, sandra , leonie appointments in 2016-7

2016 we have a whitewash of the board, 2017 we have a whitewash of the staff, that statement is hardly new news !

2016 much to everyones surprise i get elected, its been a rollercoaster for me, i will say that simon has been a GREAT help to me and my growth as a director, now as for his resolution i have told him i disagree with it, i understand it but its just to vague and a rejection of it should NOT be considered a "member revolt" but members being rational towards change with consultation first.

now 2017 we have a few great candidates and NOW here's my point finally , right now you have simon and i on the board in demand, so pick another 2, but what the end result will be is that you will end up FINALLY after soooooooooo many years 4 true demand seats on the board and its YOU who will make that decision.

we are in an era of massive change, as a board we need to pick the direction that will shape the .au space for a very long time to come and we need ON THE BOARD the right people to help make those decisions. the decisions which will be made after the AGM will affect EVERYONE including the dubbodentist.

as i see it we are still in a state of FLUX, i personally think thats a good thing right now, its what happens next that matters, we are at the top of the rollercoaster and once we go over the edge there is no stopping it.

this is why the board, PRP and the CAC are so important, getting the right people on the board is vital, getting the right CHAIR is paramount and i am on that recommendation committee and i can tell you i am working hard to make sure we have a great chair for the near future.

not a chair that perhaps has MY point of view but a chair that can bring auda back into a state of transparency, we have heard transparency so many times but i have never given up on that, i think people who know me well know thats just me.

SO, my point is, the agm is in just 15 days away, pick the people who you believe in and vote for them, this is not a time for a donkey vote or a "long shot".

cut the crap and get back to what really matters, if you do not have a board you trust then all other conversations are worthless and a distraction.

tim

yadda yadda these are my views and in no way represent any organisation i am associated with, they are however actually maybe endorsed by the ethnic peru knitting club for alpaca knit wear who make really good jumpers !

 

[neddy]

everybody has a skeleton in the closet if they are honest with themselves

Craig, firstly, sincere best wishes with your current family circumstances. That certainly does take priority to anything else.

Secondly, as I said when we chatted the other day, I was surprised that you nominated for Demand Class given your background. And having now seen the "backroom deal" done to move a Demand Director to Supply, I really wish you were standing in that Class. Why? Because not one of the 2 incumbents (or the 2 likely appointees) have an iota of Registrar experience. As Grant Wiltshire has shown, you don't have to be a Supply member to stand.

Finally though, I do wish you well in our contest (though not as well as Nicole and me!). You come across as a really decent person. Your candour and humility about your past is refreshing and commendable. Though I do have to say, with friends like Cheyne, who needs enemies!

Ned

 

[Scott7]

they are however actually maybe endorsed by the ethnic peru knitting club for alpaca knit wear who make really good jumpers !

Weren't they the knitting group sitting at the table opposite us at the last Melbourne DNTrade meetup? Maybe they overheard something.

 

[Craig Marchant]

Good morning,

I did consider Supply class, but since I’m not working for anybody in supply class I decided it would not be appropriate as it doesn’t represent my affiliation presently.

And as Cheyne mentioned earlier we have been friends for a long time now. I’ve never known him to be insincere regardless of friendship or not. And our friendship will survive that - we have been through a lot together. We can have differing opinions then move on and get the job done.

Cheers,
Craig