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

This Is Embarrassing auDA

Discussion in 'Domain News' started by neddy, May 1, 2017.

  1. DomainNames

    DomainNames Membership: Community

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2010
    Messages:
    2,320
    Likes Received:
    552
    Who can find out the answers?
     
    snoopy likes this.
  2. neddy

    neddy Membership: VIP

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2008
    Messages:
    3,702
    Likes Received:
    1,176
    auDA Member:
    Yes
    Good to see that today's article on Domainer has definitely been seen by auDA (and ICANN).

    I always post to LinkedIn and Twitter - and this was the feedback from LinkedIn (so far).
    [​IMG]
     
  3. snoopy

    snoopy Membership: VIP

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2010
    Messages:
    4,605
    Likes Received:
    1,877
    Maybe the CEO can tell us if these ideas came from him or the board?
     
    DomainNames likes this.
  4. snoopy

    snoopy Membership: VIP

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2010
    Messages:
    4,605
    Likes Received:
    1,877
    Only 2? Sounds like the stats are playing up
     
  5. neddy

    neddy Membership: VIP

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2008
    Messages:
    3,702
    Likes Received:
    1,176
    auDA Member:
    Yes
    Most directors don't list their main occupation as auDA. Judging from some phone calls I received today, I know that the majority have read my articles though.

    And believe it or not, Cameron Boardman does not seem to have a current LinkedIn listing.
     
    Last edited: May 2, 2017
    DomainNames likes this.
  6. DomainNames

    DomainNames Membership: Community

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2010
    Messages:
    2,320
    Likes Received:
    552
    Strange to see the auDA CEO has no active linkedin profile? https://www.linkedin.com/in/cameron-boardman-aa22091/
    Cameron Boardman
    Manager - Victoria & South Australia at Invest Hong Kong
    Invest Hong Kong
    Melbourne, Australia
    2 connections
     
  7. neddy

    neddy Membership: VIP

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2008
    Messages:
    3,702
    Likes Received:
    1,176
    auDA Member:
    Yes
    That's what I said - he doesn't have a current LinkedIn listing.
     
  8. snoopy

    snoopy Membership: VIP

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2010
    Messages:
    4,605
    Likes Received:
    1,877
    Right I see I missed the comment about it being a LinkedIn post. From what I know of it AUDA staff are regularly here (and I would have thought domainer also).
     
  9. DomainNames

    DomainNames Membership: Community

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2010
    Messages:
    2,320
    Likes Received:
    552
    Yes... why not is what I am asking..Maybe it was deleted too in the auDA online censoring of information clean up:)
     
    snoopy likes this.
  10. neddy

    neddy Membership: VIP

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2008
    Messages:
    3,702
    Likes Received:
    1,176
    auDA Member:
    Yes
    On the other hand, our beloved Deputy Chairman is out there "loud and proud".

    [​IMG]
     
    DomainNames likes this.
  11. DomainNames

    DomainNames Membership: Community

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2010
    Messages:
    2,320
    Likes Received:
    552
    It seems some people promote their power in such a decision making organisation as auDA when it comes to generating sales leads for their own business.

    We often see directors promote their roles at auDA when it suits them or their business. Does it help them get more business and some form of commercial or financial gain? I think in many cases it has & does.

    If I had a domain name issue I would be far more likely to contact someone on the auDA Board such as Erhan. Clearly his auDA Board role helps his profile when it comes to his existing and potential client domain name matters.

    Will Erhan see an increase in his business from confusion and issues around the pending proposed competing .au extension.. possibly or probably. Will he gain a financial benefit from this.. who knows. He may have made a disclaimer about it to auDA but nothing has been made public as we do see in most of country administration board requirements.

    I was of the opinion Erhan was previously against the proposed competing un needed .au extension but he seemed to change his mind and then voted to support it once he became a supply class director. I for one was very disappointed in this.

    We also noted this change of opinion and "unanimous" vote from Tim and Simon ( both demand representatives and on auDA Board!). I can only assume Simon changed his mind as it helped him to get all of the supply "demand" members votes and secure a role on the auDA Board again. As for Tim who knows why he changed over against what he said on this forum to us all. He certainly lost a lot of demand support after it and has chosen to talk instead about movies and anything else he can on the forum since to deflect attention and change the hot topics being discussed... yes people have noticed and are all commenting.


    Erhan had promised these would be done but again we have no updates years later..Both had been discussed in great detail.
    • FREE COR ( held up by Ausregistry or who?). Yes it can be done. Yes it is done in most other countroes FREE - The remaining period of the registration is transferred - no need for a new registration fee!)
    • RDNH policy update ( held up by who?) Erhan himself said this was needed years ago.. Who is holding it up and why?
     
  12. neddy

    neddy Membership: VIP

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2008
    Messages:
    3,702
    Likes Received:
    1,176
    auDA Member:
    Yes
    I've decided to publish a few "Top Secret" auDA documents on Domainer today. And I am taking the piss when I say they are "top secret". ;)

    In my enquiries about the rationale behind their decision to remove all these docs, one of the lines that gets trotted out is:

    “Change necessitates privacy”

    Oh, my goodness! So the removal of Minutes and Agendas and other material going back years and years is going to help facilitate this change?

    Imagine the uproar if the Government of the day decided to delete Hansard and every other record of Government decision making?

    Get real auDA!
     
    DomainNames and eBranding.com.au like this.
  13. DomainNames

    DomainNames Membership: Community

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2010
    Messages:
    2,320
    Likes Received:
    552
    Was it removed so it is harder for some people to get into REAL trouble.... is that is the real reason... Just like some well known cases files go missing, get deleted, burn't.... shredded,



    https://www.maddocks.com.au/document-retention-and-destruction-in-australia/
    The new year is fast approaching and it seems timely to remind you of legislation that goes along with a ‘cleaning out’ of the archives. Before you press delete or shred that document, be sure to exercise diligence in complying with document and record retention requirements. Non-compliance can result in economic loss or even strict criminal liability for individuals and organisations.

    Background

    There are various legislative regimes in Australia which prescribe specific timeframes for document and record retention and destruction. Non-compliance with such requirements can result in economic loss, such as losing coverage of insurance, or even strict criminal liability for individuals and organisations – the most common example being for a company, its directors and officers.

    Currently, there are around 80 Acts at both the State and Federal level which regulate document and record retention and destruction. The various regimes are not codified in any way, some are industry specific and some are catch-all legislation. Where there is an applicable regime, care should be taken to ensure that requirements in relation to the form, manner, location and length of time that documents must be kept are complied with.

    Where there is no clear legislative guidance as to the applicable retention period, the documents must be kept for a reasonable time, which is usually seven years.

    Destruction of documents


    In addition to the retention period set out in the various regimes, there are additional common law and legislative duties in relation to document destruction. For example s254 of the Crimes Act 1958 (Vic) creates an offence of the destruction of evidence which ‘is, or is reasonably likely to be, required in evidence in a legal proceeding’. "
     

    Attached Files:

    Bacon Farmer likes this.
  14. Lemon

    Lemon Membership: Trader

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2010
    Messages:
    372
    Likes Received:
    309
    I question if some of auda's new positioning is actually contradictory to it's constitution.

    Re: Transparency
    Re: Membership Code of Conduct
    Is the membership code of conduct contradictory to the Constitution which covers members conduct?

     
  15. snoopy

    snoopy Membership: VIP

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2010
    Messages:
    4,605
    Likes Received:
    1,877
    Lemon, I believe the code of conduct directly conflicts with the constitution, as you point out a member can only be removed by special resolution, not a board room vote by directors with a personal beef.
     
    DomainNames and eBranding.com.au like this.
  16. snoopy

    snoopy Membership: VIP

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2010
    Messages:
    4,605
    Likes Received:
    1,877
    The code of conduct is another example of the paranoid nature of AUDA's recent actions. Who even bothers to write stuff trying to prevent people speaking to the media or in forums? Only a very paranoid organisation.
     
  17. Scott.L

    Scott.L Membership: Trader

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2010
    Messages:
    695
    Likes Received:
    400
    auDA Member:
    Yes
    What happens next?
    Do the members vote against the member considered guilty by the directors of a breach? what is evidenced? How is it judged? How is the outcome determined? or, do we all simply know the member is a dickhead and leave it at that?
     
    DomainNames and Lemon like this.
  18. Lemon

    Lemon Membership: Trader

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2010
    Messages:
    372
    Likes Received:
    309
    Members get to vote and the accused has to buy everyone a beer.
     
    DomainNames and neddy like this.
  19. neddy

    neddy Membership: VIP

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2008
    Messages:
    3,702
    Likes Received:
    1,176
    auDA Member:
    Yes
    Latest auDA Newsletter is in.

    Domainer and DNT articles and comments have obviously got up their nose - huge justification piece within the newsletter as to why they took down all the previous Minutes / Agendas / Reports etc.

    What a load of codswallop imho.
     
    DomainNames and snoopy like this.
  20. snoopy

    snoopy Membership: VIP

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2010
    Messages:
    4,605
    Likes Received:
    1,877
    Whilst not publishing board minutes may be acceptable for some organisations, changing policy and removing minutes for an organisation with transparency, credibility and integrity issues is never going to be good idea.

    Is AUDA oblivious to the fact that they are in a very different situation to the typical organisation (i.e. most don’t have massive transparency issues) or are they just playing us for fools with that article?
     
    neddy likes this.