Brad 

Can you help me out, it seems I am unable to post to the DNS List even though I am subscribed. 

Could you see if you could post this email on my behalf?

Chesley
----- Original Message ----- 
From: Internet Registry 
To: dns§lists.auda.org.au 
Sent: Tuesday, September 16, 2003 11:31 AM
Subject: Josh Rowe + Sanctum = a lot of spare time!


Josh josh josh!

You must be a very lonely person to spend so much time
trying to find what other people are up to.

Lets start with the simple stuff, clearly you are
getting access to the same brilliant facts as auDA, my
name is Chesley Paul Rafferty. You could use Baycorp
or look at information auDA has which clearly shows my
correct name or would you prefer that I called you
Luke Joshua Rowe.

Let's have a look at a few more facts, which as an
auDA director (and someone who consistently seems to
nitpick everything everyone else does) I'm suprised
that you don't know.

Here's a simple one for you to start with. Please
point out anything that Explorer and Proweb Solutions
have done that are in breach of auDA policy. 

Also Josh please also confirm that according to you
that with the "...looming court appearance..." that I
had to register 2000 domains - are you suggesting that
I didnt intend to register those domain names, if so
please state so as I will have my lawyers prepare
documents to sue you for defamation.

While you there, can you please clarify that when you
state "Explorer Domains took the option of registering
approximately 2000
.net.au domains, which is more than double the volume
they achieved for
their first year
(http://www.auda.org.au/docs/ausregistry-y1-0203.pdf).
AusRegistry (http://www.ausregistry.com.au/) requires
prepayment for
domain names before being able to accept an order, so
with a $100,000
prepayment Explorer Domains would have done this with
full knowledge of
where the business was coming from.  " that you are
stating that Explorer and Ausregistry are in breach of
auDA policy, because I'm sure that they would be very
interested to hear that coming from you.

Also in that statement, also please detail which 10 or
more registrars knocked back Domain Names Australia
have told you that they didnt want to deal with my
company.

OK ... while you rush to your file of auDA policy -
I'll play you for awhile.

Ok how would I best play you - hmmmm... i know I'll
point out everything that you are doing in breach of
auDA policy. What!!!! Hold the press the holy Joshua
Rowe, the highest of the high AND a DIRECTOR of auDA -
surely there could be no way that you could EVER
breach policy that you helped create and endorse as
part of the board of auDA!


Well find below folks,the horrifying depth's of
Joshua's blantant abuse of auDA 
policy - worst of all it's the .au Domain Name
Suppliers' Code of Practice 

sanctum - "A sacred or holy place." 

sanctimonious - "Making a show of sanctity; affecting
saintliness; 
hypocritically devout or pious." 

Hmmm, is it possible Josh that you confused the word
you wanted. 

The following people are the elected Directors on the
Board of auDA: 
"Name (Organisation) Representing Elected Retires 
...Joshua Rowe Demand 26 Nov 2001 2003 AGM..." 

The auDA Board formally endorsed the Code on 10
September 2002. 

So Josh had been a director for almost a year when he
endorsed the Code of Practice. 

2.1 Compliance with the Code of Practice is mandatory
for all auDA accredited registrars and their appointed
resellers. A list of registrars and resellers is 
available on the auDA website at
http://www.auda.org.au/registrars 

http://www.auda.org.au/cgi-bin/reseller-search?query=sanctum+internet


Search Results - 1 reseller(s) found 
Reseller Registrar(s) 
Sanctum Internet Pty Ltd Enetica 
Last updated: Mon Sep 1 14:28:27 2003 

Now as we have a look at
https://secure.sanctum.com.au/staff.htm: 

Joshua Rowe 
B.App.Sci. (Comp Sci) 
Director 

Alternatively go to http://www.josh.id.au/ and find
Joshua Rowe - Director, 
Sanctum Internet Pty Ltd 

Let's leap into the Code down to section: 
10.1 Domain Name Suppliers must fully disclose to a
registrant the following minimum level of information:


b) Identity of the accredited Registrar being used by
the Domain Name Supplier if the Domain Name 
Supplier is NOT an accredited registrar including: 
(i) the trading name shown in the auDA list of
Registrars; 
(ii) contact information for the registrar including
telephone number in 
office hours, facsimile 
number, website address and email address; 
(iii) address of registered office of principal place
of business; 
c) terms and conditions of the domain name licence;
and 
d) processing time for domain name registrations,
customer support contact 
information and web address link to this code of
practice. 

JOSH - WHERE IS THIS INFORMATION? AS I KNOW HOW
DEDICATED YOU ARE TO KEEPING THE INTEGRITY OF AUDA
POLICY, SURELY THESE 6 AREA'S THAT YOU HAVE MISSED ARE

JUST AN OVERSIGHT ON YOUR BEHALF OR MAYBE IT IS THAT
YOU HAVE BEEN SO BUSY ON THIS LIST THAT YOU HAVENT HAD
A CHANCE TO UPDATE YOUR SITE IN THE LAST YEAR SINCE
YOU AND THE REST OF THE BOARD ENDORSED THIS POLICY? 

Sorry I've just realised I made an error - Sanctum
does have terms and conditions at: 

You just follow the registration and get to 
https://secure.sanctum.com.au/cgi-bin/register.cgi 

Which says 
"I have read and accept the terms and conditions
associated with domain 
registration and related services, and warrant that
the above information is 
true and correct" 

This provides a link to :
https://secure.sanctum.com.au/tc.html 

Which provides you with the following terms and
conditions: 

"these are the terms & conditions " 

** Stop looking for the rest of the terms and
conditions - this is all that Sanctum provides ** 

BUT THEN IT GETS WORSE - IT STILL KEEPS GETTING WORSE!


12.1 Domain Name Suppliers must: 
b) publish and observe a written complaints handling
process which is available to all registrants at 
no charge; 
c) provide a web address to auDA for Consumer
information, including Consumer Guide and FAQ; 
15.2 Visibility and Accessibility 
a) Domain Name Suppliers' Complaint handling processes
must: 
(i) be publicised to Customers and staff; 
(ii) include information to Customers about their
right to complain; and 
(iii) specify how the Domain Name Supplier can be
contacted in order to make a Complaint. 

JOSH - HELP ME OUT!! IVE BEEN LOOKING ALL OVER YOUR
SITE BUT I STILL CANT 
FIND THIS COMPLAINT POLICY? THAT IS SO STRANGE BECAUSE
AS A DIRECTOR OFF AUDA 
(AS YOU SO CLEARLY DISPLAY AT JOSH.ID.AU) WOULD NEVER
DELIBERATELY LEAVE OFF 
THESE KIND OF DETAILS? 

PLEASE CAN YOU SORT OUT YOUR WEBSITE AS I AM SO
WORRIED ABOUT WHAT COULD HAPPEN IF NEWS OF THIS GOT
OUT TO THE GENERAL PUBLIC. IT COULD DEVASTATE 
YOUR CHANCES OF RE-ELECTION AT THIS YEARS AGM! 

ALSO TO HELP CLEAR UP YOUR GOOD NAME, YOU SHOULD
CLARIFY YOUR POSITION TO YOUR FELLOW DNS FRIENDS BY
ANSWERING THE FOLLOWING QUESTION: 

DO YOU FEEL THAT YOUR SANCTUM DOESN'T HAVE TO ABIDE BY
AUDA POLICY? 
OR DO YOU NOT UNDERSTAND AUDA POLICY? 

Josh i have seen the same stream of information come
from you for 2 years, most of it repetitive, like
you're trying to impress the next group of DNS
members, and I think I've only bothered to waste my
time once or twice before to write on this list. 

However, I will still be speaking to my lawyers today to consider what possible legal I can take against you personally. You see I can get good economy's of scale with my lawyers.

I would also be happy for anyone who would like to
consider being a part of a representative class action
against Josh (pending legal advice), to get in contact
with me.

Josh if you are lonely or need someone to talk to,
please feel free to call me, you seem to have all my
numbers anyway or send me a email and Ill give you a
call, or I could even drop round and say hello at some
stage.

Your obsession

Chesley


PS John Thomson. Yes you should not piss Josh off. He is very scary the way that he can do Whois look ups! I'm personally amazed most of us can sleep at night! More importantly how much terror would he cause if he started doing more Google searches. THE HORROR!!