1. Welcome to DNTrade. If you want to find out about the latest domain name industry news or talk, share, learn, buy, sell, trade or develop domain names - then you've come to the right place. It's a diverse and active community, with domain investors, web developers and online marketers - and it's free! Click here to join now.
    Dismiss Notice

auDA's "rigged" new constitution and member model exposed

Discussion in 'Domain News' started by DomainNames, Sep 1, 2018.

  1. DomainNames

    DomainNames Membership: Community

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2010
    Messages:
    3,334
    Likes Received:
    789
    The model was orchstreated by auDA Management and Ian Hanke.

    It was not developed by the CMWG

    The fact is the CMWG didnt even vote to put it to the auDA Membership so auDA bullied them.

    The bullied and manipulated CMWG then voted with pressure from some and auDA Manegement
    • 8 voted to even put the auDA Management to the members last week
    • 5 members voted NOT to even put it to the members last week
    • 2 Didn't even vote.
    It appears some auDA Members may have close connections to auDA and even Laurie Patton who is working for Afilias the monopoly .au wholesale registry subcontractor.

    Do some on the CMWG want to get onto the auDA Gravy train themselves or via their other associations for auDA Foundation grants.

    Clearly some of them know nothing the .au namespace, domains names and where not even aware of auDA membership or where auDA members before joining the CMWG. Some on thew CMWG remain not even auDA members now!

    https://www.itwire.com/open-sauce/84248-auda-s-new-working-model-aims-to-boost-board-s-power.html

    "auDA's new working model aims to boost board's power
    The new membership model unveiled a few days ago by auDA, the organisation that manages the Australian domain namespace, is an unabashed attempt to gain more power and quash any individuals who dare to dissent.

    Every measure proposed is aimed at this single outcome which is surprising for an organisation that is supposed to be a community organisation. And what is more, the aims are not hidden but rather stated openly in the draft.

    The board is attempting to meet the demands of a Federal Government review issued in April that found its management framework was no longer fit for purpose. A new framework has been proposed and has to be put in place by April 2020, as per the government's demands.

    For example, in the new model the move to cut off members' rights to call for a special general meeting — there is a percentage of the total membership cited as a quorum right now — is justified by blaming this for the instability that the organisation has gone through over the last two years.

    And it says in language, that can only be described as authoritarian: "If it is not immediately addressed, this ongoing instability will detract from auDA's ability to properly carry out its role as the policy authority and industry self-regulatory body for the .au domain space.
    "This is because of the impact on auDA's ability to attract and retain high quality directors and the time spent by the Board and the organisation responding to the requests of a small minority of vocal members. Stability is critical to auDA and a transition period is necessary to ensure that stability."

    Democracy is a messy business and it looks like the auDA board has just about recognised this. But a dictatorship, benevolent or otherwise, is not the answer. Else, we should all migrate to Turkey immediately. Or maybe Saudi Arabia.

    The entire model was "developed by the board with inputs from the Consultation Model Working Group and other parties". Why wasn't a separate committee — or even the CMWG — allowed to develop it in isolation from the board? It is obvious that the board would be an intimidating factor in such discussions. Self-regulation is always the worst form of regulation - the royal commission into the financial services industry has aptly illustrated that.

    And then there is the nominations committee – which is appointed by the board and in turn appoints directors. Which sounds a mite too close for comfort. What is not understandable is why the current board wants to have a hand in everything that is being devised, rather than appoint separate committees and entrust the work to them. It looks very much like the Trump White House.

    As to the membership classes, if auDA is to have any credibility on this score, then the two existing classes - Supply and Demand - should be made equal with regard to voting at AGMs immediately. The existing practice of needing a majority in each class to pass _any_ resolution only protects the board.

    As per the organisation's own definitions, Demand class membership is meant "for domain name holders (registrants), internet users and the general public". Supply class membership is for "domain name industry participants (registry operators, registrars and resellers)".

    As I have pointed out earlier, it is patently clear that members from the Supply class would hesitate to vote against any management decision as they are dependent on the organisation for their livelihood.

    The new model seeks to have three years to make members equal. That is very clearly intended to build up as many members as possible who are aligned — or who will be scared not to align — with the management's views. There was a push for members earlier this year and a FoI query has been made about it, since as many 955 members were recruited in a single month. This, in an organisation which had something like 350-odd members until then.

    Of course, when queries were raised, auDA's response was to say that expert legal advice had been obtained about the membership and there was nothing wrong. But just because expensive lawyers give an opinion, it does not mean they are right.

    The prime aim of the current board appears to be generation and salting away of as much profit as possible - which seems strange given that auDA is a non-profit. But without money, how would one hire expensive PR practitioners like Ian Hanke to handle media relations? Hanke, an adviser to the Tasmanian state Liberal government, once charged as much as $934 for a day's work. A lot of PR is needed to push this kind of model and Hanke is no slouch."
     
    Bacon Farmer likes this.
  2. findtim

    findtim Membership: VIP

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2011
    Messages:
    7,746
    Likes Received:
    1,871
    auDA Member:
    Yes
    "promised the world and delivered an altas"

    tim
     
  3. Bacon Farmer

    Bacon Farmer Membership: VIP

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2009
    Messages:
    1,386
    Likes Received:
    945
    Can't get elected as a director by the members? Well there's always Plan B, suck up to the board and get appointed. Pesky members, who needs them.
     
  4. Cal

    Cal Administrator

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2012
    Messages:
    566
    Likes Received:
    99
    We've had to moderate a several posts on this thread. Please make sure you follow the forum rules before posting.
     
  5. sasha

    sasha Membership: VIP

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2011
    Messages:
    103
    Likes Received:
    19
    you didn't moderate anything, you deleted posts that went against the groupthink mentality of the self proclaimed wannabe domainers

    please tell us which of your 12 forum rules that were broken as to most people it looks like you are just protecting the local cabal
    1. NO BULLYING
    2. NO RUDE, ABUSIVE, DEFAMATORY, OFFENSIVE, RACIST, DISCRIMINATORY MATERIAL
    3. NO TROLLING
    4. NO SPAMMING
    5. NO BUMPING
    6. NO ILLEGAL BEHAVIOUR
    7. NO DUPLICATE ACCOUNTS
    8. NO COMMENTS IN SALES THREADS
    9. NO PROMOTING OR LINKING
    10. NO AFFILIATE LINKS OR ADVERTISING
    11. NO REPRODUCTION OR DISTRIBUTING OF CONTENT
    12. NO DISCUSSION OF MODERATOR ACTIONS
     
  6. findtim

    findtim Membership: VIP

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2011
    Messages:
    7,746
    Likes Received:
    1,871
    auDA Member:
    Yes
    material also = words imo

    i read it ALL late last night and support dnt's decision totally, so i'll go with this one above.
    i found it not in line with the spirit of dnt so i notified them to access the thread.
    posting someones domain list is RUDE, telling them the names are shit ( or words to that affect) is OFFENSIVE as they didn't ask for your critique, who makes you an expert?
    NOTE: if you ask for a critique its totally different, BF didn't

    tim
     
    Andrew Wright and geodomains like this.
  7. Cal

    Cal Administrator

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2012
    Messages:
    566
    Likes Received:
    99
    Sasha, you are welcome to post you point of view as long as you remain respectful of others and avoid personal attacks. It was not just your posts that were moderated on this thread.
     
  8. sasha

    sasha Membership: VIP

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2011
    Messages:
    103
    Likes Received:
    19
    i didn't attack nor disrespect anyone with my recent posts, the "wannabe domainer" cabal attacked me

    yet you removed my posts, hypocritical much?
     
  9. Cal

    Cal Administrator

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2012
    Messages:
    566
    Likes Received:
    99
    There was a series of posts that were flagged by several members on this thread. It was not just your posts that were moderated.
     
    DomainNames likes this.
  10. sasha

    sasha Membership: VIP

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2011
    Messages:
    103
    Likes Received:
    19
    so you take down posts whenever some fruitcake bitches to you about their soft, snuggly and cuddly little feelings being hurt

    oh, the pleb domainers have spoken
     
  11. Cal

    Cal Administrator

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2012
    Messages:
    566
    Likes Received:
    99
    The discussion was out of line. It was moderated. If you have an issue with certain individuals take it offline.
     
    DomainNames likes this.
  12. Scott.L

    Scott.L Membership: Trader

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2010
    Messages:
    1,071
    Likes Received:
    700
    auDA Member:
    Yes
    Hundreds of 3-month-old Newly minted Foreign (non-Australian) auDA Members from Philippine call centre in Cebu, Ukraine, Singapore, US and Canada will be required to Vote for their own “REMOVAL AS MEMBERS” due to auDA’s new membership Model, which requires the Member to be an Australian Resident. And, if that wasn’t insulting enough, After these members have voted for their own removal as members, auDA will refund their Membership Fee?

    upload_2018-9-5_12-44-34.png

    I decided to send some feedback to auDA reform, here
     
    Bacon Farmer likes this.
  13. findtim

    findtim Membership: VIP

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2011
    Messages:
    7,746
    Likes Received:
    1,871
    auDA Member:
    Yes
    here's the proxy's, the red envelope is their refund request in advance. job done !
    congrats richard bullock for sitting back and watching all this happen.
    upload_2018-9-5_13-40-48.png
     
    Scott.L likes this.
  14. Scott.L

    Scott.L Membership: Trader

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2010
    Messages:
    1,071
    Likes Received:
    700
    auDA Member:
    Yes
  15. Scott.L

    Scott.L Membership: Trader

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2010
    Messages:
    1,071
    Likes Received:
    700
    auDA Member:
    Yes
  16. Scott.L

    Scott.L Membership: Trader

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2010
    Messages:
    1,071
    Likes Received:
    700
    auDA Member:
    Yes
  17. Scott.L

    Scott.L Membership: Trader

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2010
    Messages:
    1,071
    Likes Received:
    700
    auDA Member:
    Yes
    "any person who is eligible to hold a .au domain name licence to be an Associate Member"

    Eligibility could refer to Australian Resident as per GAC Principle 9.1.6. All .au registrations require the registrant to be resident in Australia.
    But, the current proposed constitution does not specify the GAC 9.1.6 and, if the PRP were to open .au Direct Registrations up to persons outside Australia (which would require a change to the GAC principles) if successful, the membership would be out of control. How could it be vetted according to their rules?

    in my opinion, auDA needs to change "eligibility" to Australian Resident or Australian Citizen to avoid any future doubt.

    Submit your feedback to auDA here:
     
  18. Scott.L

    Scott.L Membership: Trader

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2010
    Messages:
    1,071
    Likes Received:
    700
    auDA Member:
    Yes
    Did anyone notice 3.2 Activities is missing from the new Constitution?

    upload_2018-9-5_22-28-0.png

    auDA is no longer required to "promote competition", it doesn't need to be accountable to the community, it doesn't need to promote fair trading or offer consumer protection?

    They also Removed any reference to "Australian Internet Community" - I wonder what 1.2 now means? in terms of Who, "wider community" in Australia?

    Ahhhh...whatever, do whatever fellas. You only got 11 more sleeps to go and its LOCKDOWN.
     
  19. findtim

    findtim Membership: VIP

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2011
    Messages:
    7,746
    Likes Received:
    1,871
    auDA Member:
    Yes
    SOOO glad i won't be one that actually approves all this rubbish, you should all realise now if you didn't before why i felt the need to resign............ i saw all this coming down the shute.

    the sad thing is directors are gas lighted into "don't read dnt " WHY, so there is no other check or balance to the filter the auda board is provided, i was told on many occasions to stay off dnt, from the FIRST DAY, not to post, not to read and i was even told not to talk to dnt members...... especially you know who, didn't they love it when he became a director !

    this is truly a governance disaster, if i was to grab the list of what a board should be as per the AICD course i did then EVERY item would have a cross next to it for auda except for " in the best interests of the corporation " but that then totally disregards corporate responsibility.

    look at essendon footy club and the drug drama, they got caught and the afl came down on them, and KEPT at them, now a few years on there is next to no social issues with them, they didn't close down shop, cut members out in actual fact they kept the door wide open through the process.

    but auda and the gov review, the gov just sit back and let auda achieve goals at any cost, richard bullock probably sits and says "there's nothing i can do" BS, if richard can't see how 955 new members get to vote on reform and then vote themselves out and doesn't see the total dishonesty in that event then why is he in the position he has?

    after this richard people are just going to walk all over you for the rest of your career, you haven't controlled this situation, you have sat on your hands, whats really sad is i strongly suspect richard actually agrees with me that this is all wrong, i don't have proof but i have talked to him once and found him very intelligent and a deep thinker, an analyst type mind and thus my ongoing disappointment of lack of action.

    richard, i had breakfast with THE kevin sheedy the other day and he said to me " don't hop on a plane with something left undone" and in the context of our conversation he meant, once you are on the plane the moment is GONE, the GM is that plane for you.

    someones going to read this, i hope its you richard

    tim
     
    Bacon Farmer likes this.
  20. Jimboot

    Jimboot Membership: Community

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2011
    Messages:
    216
    Likes Received:
    162
    The "current thinking" of the PRP in Feb was anyone can register a .AU no restrictions, no rules. At least that is what was said at the public forum.