Michael
I would like to point out that I am concerned that ISOC-AU are being
"labelled" as recalcitrants in this debate when I am sure that their
concerns possibly extend to a larger grey area.
For mine, I am concerned that an organisation such as Tradegate is to
be seen as represntative of E-Commerce and commercial Internet activity
by virtue of being involved with ADNA.  This is a very complex matter 
and many organisations which have or will have a major stake in this
issue are probably not even aware of ADNA.  Just because Tradegate has
an official sounding name and boast "x many" companies (there are many
associations that can boast "2x many" or more companies) does not mean
they are qualified to represent the issues of "the commercial sector".
To quote the Tradegate representative at an earlier forum "E-Commerce
adoption by Australian companies is being held back by confusions over
domain names [or something like that]" which just shows how well
informed
some of the members of the Board of ADNA can be.
What can happen is that this whole ADNA thing snowballs and takes on 
more and more dimensions and then we can have problems.

Michael Malone wrote:
> 
> 
> Proposal Two
> ------------
> 
> Each new member to ADNA nominates a name space which it believes
> itself to have the highest stake in.  The board may veto
> ridiculous allocations (eg: Tradegate nominating GOV.AU.  This
> may be fair for some of its members, but realistically, Tradegate
> is focussed on the commercial end user more than any other
> single sector).  Votes by ADNA need to be ratified by the
> general membership, plus if they effect a particular domain, then
> the members that have nominated that domain must also ratify it.
> 
> 
> MM

-- 
ramin marzbani
www.consult pty limited
http://www.consultco.com.au

Looking for a Web Developer? Try http://web-developers.com
Have Your Say - 
       if you live in Thailand http://www.researchco.th.com
       or if you live in Malaysia
http://www.researchco.com.sg/malay.html