auDA Statement re Michaella Richards

Hopefully the CEO will keep his nose out of it this time. It is decision for the board.

findtim said:

we are doing it the right way, whilst noting your suggests from the sgm.
if we were to appoint anyone without a due process you wouldn't/shouldn't like it, true?
you'll notice it isn't a long drawn out process with applications closing monday 4pm.

i honestly think you need to give us a tick on this one and then we can work towards accessing the suggested alternatives.

tim

Click to expand...

I'm already sceptical especially with this statement in the press release,

Applicants with demonstrated company director experience are particularly encouraged to nominate.

Click to expand...

This is about finding a replacement for the original *elected* director.

it is a casual vacancy and they will need to go to election at the agm
tim

findtim said:

it is a casual vacancy and they will need to go to election at the agm
tim

Click to expand...

I know that, what I am saying is AUDA is finding a replacement for the original elected director. It is not about AUDA finding someone they like, it is about what members would want. They are replacing on behalf of those demand members.

The stuff about "Applicants with demonstrated company director experience are particularly encouraged to nominate." is absolute garbage. That is more of the same that got us into this mess.

snoopy said:

I know that, what I am saying is AUDA is finding a replacement for the original elected director. It is not about AUDA finding someone they like, it is about what members would want. They are replacing on behalf of those demand members.

The stuff about "Applicants with demonstrated company director experience are particularly encouraged to nominate." is absolute garbage. That is more of the same that got us into this mess.

Click to expand...

@snoopy - hammer; nail; head (as usual).

If anyone from auDA trys the same bulldust as last time, then their words from the SGM are worthless. Shane has "Demand Class" experience - simple as that. And he came 3rd last election.

The fact is, in 3 months time, anyone can stand without any past demonstrated "company director" experience - and it doesn't matter if they were a bikie; a dustman; or a Prime Minister in a past life. The members vote for them then. Even someone like Tim can get elected.

auDA - please prove that your promises of listening to members are not just hollow words - and that "tomorrow does indeed start today".

thats right, anyone can stand for election, even non members, speaking as a member and not a director i agree that elected member director vacancies should go once again to a vote but thats not the case right now and as everyone has said in the past " its not in the constitution " so we have to read it that way and not switch it when it suits .

enough from me on this i think, you'll only have to wait till tuesday for an outcome.

tim
PS @DomainNames, you'll have to wait another year for me.

findtim said:

thats right, anyone can stand for election, even non members, speaking as a member and not a director i agree that elected member director vacancies should go once again to a vote but thats not the case right now and as everyone has said in the past " its not in the constitution " so we have to read it that way and not switch it when it suits .

Click to expand...

Agree, clearly it can't go to a vote (aside from just keeping it vacant and waiting for the AGM), however the idea of AUDA just appointing who they want or making up their own criteria makes no sense to me and I suspect most members would agree.

The person appointed is supposed to be a "demand class" director. AUDA needs to carefully reflect on what that actually means. The only experience relevant is "demand class" experience.

Has there been any official statement on why she resigned? I guess most of us have a good idea why she resigned, but I thought an official statement would useful for members, even if it's all 'spin'.

Happy to give you a kick on this one and others where required.

findtim said:

thats right, anyone can stand for election, even non members, speaking as a member and not a director i agree that elected member director vacancies should go once again to a vote but thats not the case right now and as everyone has said in the past " its not in the constitution " so we have to read it that way and not switch it when it suits .

enough from me on this i think, you'll only have to wait till tuesday for an outcome.

tim
PS @DomainNames, you'll have to wait another year for me.

Click to expand...

You could resign also? Might be time for a full fresh Board.. that means both new Supply & Demand Directors.
...Some Directors said they where voting one way at Board meetings and standing up putting forward members concerns but the recently released minutes seem to show Erhan was the only one on record for a few things like getting Board Minutes back etc....That seems to be different to what 2 Board members claimed when they said they where the only ones who wanted Board minutes back... This is why Board minutes are sometimes useful even though people are understandably skeptical they are actually full & accurate.

A lot of trust has been lost between members and auDA/ auDA Board. I would not be calling for pats on the back yet for you, auDA or the Board.

Most of this mess could have been avoided, auDA and the Board created it! It must have cost paying .au registrants a fortune or wasted auDA funds ( .au domain name registrant money).

What did it cost to find Michaella? Was using paid recruiters the right thing to do ( it seems not) or should it have gone to a member vote?

DomainNames said:

...Some Directors said they where voting one way at Board meetings and standing up putting forward members concerns but the recently released minutes seem to show Erhan was the only one on record for a few things like getting Board Minutes back etc....That seems to be different to what 2 Board members claimed when they said they where the only ones who wanted Board minutes back... This is why Board minutes are sometimes useful even though people are understandably skeptical they are actually full & accurate.

A lot of trust has been lost between members and auDA/ auDA Board. I would not be calling for pats on the back yet for you, auDA or the Board.

Most of this mess could have been avoided, auDA and the Board created it! It must have cost paying .au registrants a fortune or wasted auDA funds ( .au domain name registrant money).

Click to expand...

Some good points raised @DomainNames. Whilst the Board and CEO are always quick to point out all the supposedly good things they have achieved over the past 18 months, the fact is, a lot of disappointing things have also happened. The primary thing that was forgotten (imo) was that auDA is a membership organisation. It took concerned members to bring them back to reality.

With regards individual directors, this is a comment I made on DNT back on December 13, 2016:

My suggestion to Tim for any future discussions (that he disagrees with) is to make sure he asks the Company Secretary to record his position on the Minutes. The rest of the Board and CEO won't like that.

Click to expand...

I also privately urged Tim to do so - because these sort of things have a habit of eventually coming out (as they have done now). You need to show where you stand - otherwise, be prepared to cop the criticism.

Erhan "tomorrow starts today" is an "operator" - I don't say that disparingly - simply that he understands how the system works.

neddy said:

I also privately urged Tim to do so - because these sort of things have a habit of eventually coming out (as they have done now). You need to show where you stand - otherwise, be prepared to cop the criticism.

Click to expand...

Agree, the minutes are what members see and they'll form opinions on performance based on that.

Erhan has made a good decision to oppose the removal of the minutes and in my opinion Simon made a appropriate decision to vote against the name change to AUHQ. Going back further in time Simon also very wisely abstained from the vote to appoint the CEO.

findtim said:

enough from me on this i think, you'll only have to wait till tuesday for an outcome.

tim
PS @DomainNames, you'll have to wait another year for me.

Click to expand...

So what was the outcome?

we had some VERY late applications for the position, thus we had to arrange interviews and some of the availability for interviews of applicants extended past a possible board discussion to make a decision.

i took part in every interview, and i will be submitting my notes on monday for board members review, we hope to make a decision asap.
i'm sorry for the delay but i am happy with the process we have taken for such an important decision.

tim

Did Michaella give a reason for her resignation?

i haven't seen michaella's resignation letter and if i had i wouldn't comment, we need to draw some new lines in the sand as i think members ( not singling you out BF ) presently think everything the board does is open to discussion.

for the record last board meeting, i didn't order a coffee i had a coke, i had a ham cheese and tomato sandwich on sourdough bread , 2 glasses of water and 1 "eclipse mint" for that extra special mouth freshness and tooth plaque control.

we need to get back to some form of reality and let the board do its job, thats why you voted us in.

tim

Bacon Farmer said:

Did Michaella give a reason for her resignation?

Click to expand...

Popular demand?

Michaella's reason for resigning is a matter of interest to members. It's also a reflection on those that picked her.

At least Miguel gave a reason.

And I think it is something the board should have shed some light on instead of completely blanking it.

"we need to get back to some form of reality and let the board do its job, thats why you voted us in."

And that's why we recently had a special general meeting because we don't trust you.

Bacon Farmer said:

we don't trust you.

Click to expand...

i'm going to hope you meant you don't trust the board and not you just you don't trust ME ?

i totally acknowledge that you don't trust "us", it is on my mind constantly, CONSTANTLY, i am doing all i can do to shift that view for you, for members both supply and demand, stakeholders and everyone that owns a domain name and that is NOT political BS speak, its tim connell talk.

i read EVERYTHING that is written on this forum, from newbies and latest sales and most importantly "friday funnies", i don't hide that i have logged in, i don't say "oh i never read dnt or domainer and various other blogs in australia" , i am here, i will say however i don't follow overseas blogs closely.

my skills are to prioritise, analyse problems and create solutions, i can recall doing these actions back when 10 years old, i spoke to my mum in brissie yesterday ( it was her 86th birthday) and she said i've had these skills since birth ! and this process is what i am doing for you and the organisation. its innate in me.

LOL, right now, you just have to trust me !

as always everyone knows my email and mobile phone number, www.whitecollarwebsites.com.au my hours are 10am-3pm, 4pm - 10pm
tim

Trust you? Are you serious, there's been a shed load of major issues considered and dealt with by the board over the last year and the amount of consultation with the members has been non existent. The exclusive negotiation with aUSregistry, the strategy of flogging .au to international buyers, the name change to auHQ for example.

You are a good guy Tim but this trust me mantra hasn't worked over the last year.