Snoopy, I agree with you on many matters relating to auDA. But, of course, we will agree to disagree on some issues.
I was involved with the establishment of both the ANZIAs and the Australian IGF, two initiatives that the vast majority on this forum would call a massive waste of industry money. That is fine, I am willing to wear that on the chin and I'm happy to engage in a socialist vs capitalist debate about auDA's Constitutionally-defined role in engaging the Australian Internet community. But at least those two initiatives were controlled by auDA and we always tried to navigate a path close to auDA's core values and responsibilities.
Although not directly involved in the auDA Foundation, I can still confidently say that it was operated with the utmost probity and transparency. You can go back through the Minutes, the Foundation's financial records, and the list of recipients that benefited from funding and contributed in some way to the Australian community through the use of the Internet.
We will no-doubt disagree on whether the initiative was worthwhile but I can assure you that there was never anything dodgy nor random about it.
All of that said, I am surprised at the direction the current auDA regime has taken with regards to developing an Index for digital entrepreneurship (oh, and also becoming a national sponsor of the
AIIA's iAward's) when their initial platform for reform was improving transparency, putting a stop to "profligate" spending and "graft".
I would still argue with you about the benefits or otherwise of previous initiatives but at least those were more transparent and folks on DNTrade and other fora could debate, complain, oppose, protest etc.
I am just asking where these recent partnerships came from and why there is no visibility to stakeholders on how much this costs. I am not hypocritical about previous auDA engagements, but I believe the current leadership is. /rant