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

Does AUDA hope to remove its membership base?

Discussion in 'Domain News' started by snoopy, Dec 19, 2017.

?

Do you think AUDA wants to get rid of members?

  1. Yes

    7 vote(s)
    63.6%
  2. No

    3 vote(s)
    27.3%
  3. Unsure

    1 vote(s)
    9.1%
  1. snoopy

    snoopy Membership: VIP

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2010
    Messages:
    5,430
    Likes Received:
    2,365
    There has been rumblings ever since the aftermath of the SGM that AUDA would like to remove its membership base to prevent that type of broad member dissent ever happening again. I think AUDA's submission to the government review makes this fairly clear re getting rid of members.

    I guess a question is what is AUDA hoping for given members would be very unlikely to vote in Options 1 to 4?

    https://auda.org.au/assets/auDA-DOCA-Response-Final-18DEC2017.pdf
     
  2. DomainNames

    DomainNames Membership: Community

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2010
    Messages:
    3,343
    Likes Received:
    789
    Should people and members be looking to start another organisation to replace auDA is the question
    I think it is more likely the Government will get rid of auDA with another organisation or do the job themselves and yes of course Government will still have ways for stakeholders and consumers to have a say... perhaps even more so than now.
     
  3. Lemon

    Lemon Membership: Trader

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2010
    Messages:
    488
    Likes Received:
    347
    And the first thing the government will do is introduce direct registrations so that all Australian will be able to register a .au.
     
  4. DomainNames

    DomainNames Membership: Community

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2010
    Messages:
    3,343
    Likes Received:
    789
    Who from Government has said this exactly? It is the opposite actually.

    Once they digged a little deeper they lost faith in what auDA was doing and saying.. and that goes for the proposed competing additional .au extension also.
     
  5. DnEbook

    DnEbook Membership: VIP

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2008
    Messages:
    6,559
    Likes Received:
    1,000
    "those pesky members have caused too much trouble"
     
    Last edited: Dec 20, 2017
    DamianLondon, Scott7 and snoopy like this.
  6. snoopy

    snoopy Membership: VIP

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2010
    Messages:
    5,430
    Likes Received:
    2,365
    Whilst that would be good news for you I don't think that outcome is a given at all.
     
  7. Lemon

    Lemon Membership: Trader

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2010
    Messages:
    488
    Likes Received:
    347
    Let me think about that.
    The .au namespace represents Australia.
    Should I (as a government) introduce direct registrations, inline with my international counterparts?
    Should I give $20 odd million Australian citizens the ability to represent themselves as Australians in a global market/community.
    or
    Should I restrict the namespace to business so that they can make a profit?
    Tough call.
     
    Cheyne likes this.
  8. snoopy

    snoopy Membership: VIP

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2010
    Messages:
    5,430
    Likes Received:
    2,365
    I have doubts that the government is going to bring in a something potentially damaging, if auDA do it the government can blame auDA when it falls apart. Why would the government take responsibility for something that will potentially create uncertainty and drive business to non Australian extensions? Do you think the government will be holding a lottery as well?

    I think if auDA is scrapped they won't simply say "Let's bring in all of auDA's proposed policies".
     
  9. Lemon

    Lemon Membership: Trader

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2010
    Messages:
    488
    Likes Received:
    347
    I could quite easily see a politician standing in front of Canberra announcing that all Australians will now be able to have there own Australian domain name. Plenty of votes in that.
    No. They will probably go down the route of first come, first served. No hierarchy of rights. Maybe a sunrise period to keep businesses happy.
    I would also imagine they would look at the monetization policy in more detail.
     
  10. Bacon Farmer

    Bacon Farmer Membership: VIP

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2009
    Messages:
    1,396
    Likes Received:
    955
    The general public don't want their own domain, Australian or not. There's no demand for that > see id.au's massive fail.

    The small business people who do, will take a very dim view of any politician that allows someone to take the shorter version of their domain. Sure there's votes in that.... votes for the other side.
     
    DomainNames, Andrew Wright and snoopy like this.
  11. DomainNames

    DomainNames Membership: Community

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2010
    Messages:
    3,343
    Likes Received:
    789
    Who exactly has the auDA membership model worked for over the years?

    We still see the same problems from 10 years ago...

    auDA had the chance to change the membership model to something like the CIRA but they don't want to.... why not?
    https://www.auda.org.au/about-auda/our-org/board-meetings/2007/070416/

    Board Minutes - 16 April 2007
    Public Version
    Meeting of the .au Domain Administration Board

    16 April 2007 - 1.00pm
    .au Domain Administration Limited. 1 Queens Road. Melbourne VIC 3004

    Present:
    Chris Disspain, David Goldstein, Julie Hammer, Kim Heitman, Cheryl Langdon-Orr, Jo Lim, Bennett Oprysa, Josh Rowe, Peter Shilling and Tony Staley

    Teleconference:
    Marty Drill and Brett Fenton

    Observers:
    Craig Ng (Maddocks), John Higgins (Hayes Knight), Brenton Thomas, Don Williams and Paul Szyndler (DCITA)

    Apologies:
    Nil

    Action Items:
    • auDA staff to advise registrars of the fee reduction, and publish the new fee model.
    • The board to set up a sub-committee to consider demand class membership issues.

    1. Continuous Disclosure

    DG advised that he is doing consulting work for Domain Directors, an auDA accredited registrar.

    2. Confirmation of Minutes

    The minutes of the February 2007 meeting were confirmed.

    3. Policy Development

    • 2007 Names Policy Panel
    Derek Whitehead gave a progress report on the Panel’s first two meetings. The attendance rate at both meetings was high. The Panel has held general discussion of all three issues under review, with a particular focus to date on direct registrations. The Panel’s first public consultation paper is expected to be released in May/June.

    DW noted that this is the first Panel that will have evidence-based input, ie. the market research being conducted by auDA.

    4. Finance Report

    The board noted the March accounts.

    5. 07/10 Budget and Fee Model

    The board approved the proposed 07/10 Budget. The following points were noted:
    • the education and media budget may need to be increased if there are significant changes to policy arising from the Names Panel
    • the basis for calculating the annual ICANN fee may change in future
    • the international travel budget will be split into ‘meetings’ and ‘other’
    • the internet traffic budget is still to be determined, but has been estimated using the current deal with AAPT as a guide
    • it is highly unlikely that there will be any future windfall gains from one-off domain name allocations like the generics auction in 2002.

    It was noted that one of the first responsibilities of the Stability and Security Advisory Committee (currently being formed) will be to provide the board with advice on a suitable allocation for the security and stability contingency fund. Until then, a notional amount has been allocated. Once the ‘correct’ amount is known, the board will then be in a position to calculate the available remaining surplus and decide what steps to take to reduce it.

    The board agreed the proposed new auDA domain name fee model, with the fee to be set according to the number of domain name registrations. It was noted that the model would provide greater certainty and transparency to the industry, and better guidance to the board for future budget deliberations. Pursuant to the model, the board agreed to reduce the fee to $3.00 ex GST (subsequently amended to $3.00 ex GST) on 1 May 2007 .

    Action: auDA staff to advise registrars of the fee reduction, and publish the new fee model.

    6. CEO Report

    The following issues were noted:

    • edu.au
    auDA has granted a further 3 month extension to the Sub-Sponsorship Agreement, until 30 June 2007. A representative from AICTEC has been invited to attend the June board meeting to present the proposed changes to edu.au policy.

    7. auDA Foundation Report

    CD advised that reports from the current grant recipients will be provided at the June board meeting.

    8. auCD Report

    The board noted the report from auCD, and requested more detailed reports in future.

    The board also noted that auDA will hold a review of the community geographic domain names policy later this year.

    9. Constitutional Review

    The board discussed a paper drafted by CN outlining possible changes to the auDA Constitution to address three issues:
    1. potential supply side capture of demand class
    2. supply related person standing as a demand class director
    3. related entities holding multiple supply class memberships.


    The board affirmed the need to ensure that the Constitution is effective and achieves auDA’s objectives. The board also noted the importance of achieving a fair and reasonable balance between supply and demand, obesrving that there will always be a tendency for demand class to be under-represented.

    The board agreed changes to address issues 2 and 3 above, as proposed in paras 4.2, 4.4 and 4.5 of the board paper. It was decided that the change proposed in para 4.3 of the board paper to address issue 1 may not be effective, and further consideration should be given to options for increasing demand class membership and making it more representative.

    Motion (proposed JR, seconded Julie H): That the proposed new definition of ‘Supply Related Person’ and proposed amendments to clauses 9.4 and 18.3 be put to members at an EGM. Carried unanimously.

    Action: The board to set up a sub-committee to consider demand class membership issues.

    12. Membership Applications

    The members below were approved in the classes indicated:

    Brad Winton (demand)
    Get Started (Australia) Pty Ltd (supply)
    Emerging IT Pty Ltd (supply)
    Velocit Business Systems Pty Ltd (supply)
    Connectivity Australia Pty Ltd (supply)

    13. Board Correspondence

    There was no board correspondence.

    15. Next Meeting

    The next board meeting will be held on Tuesday 12 June at 10.30am in Sydney.​
     
  12. snoopy

    snoopy Membership: VIP

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2010
    Messages:
    5,430
    Likes Received:
    2,365
    Some interesting commentary out today about the 1999 republic vote and the reasons why it failed,

    http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/ca...c/news-story/e81bb7b64a16d46d28960d9a22eb0a62

    Do auDA realise that a bunch of proposals (the first 4) aimed at reducing the rights of the membership base have no chance of success? Are they completely out of touch to suggest such models in the first place?

    If auDA's aim is to remove the membership base or diminish the importance of popularly elected directors what chance does auDA have of achieving that?