> On 17 Aug 2004 at 15:10, Chris Maltby wrote:
>> The argument is that the political services provided by members of
>> parliament and candidates on behalf of their party is "a service that the
>> registrant provides", which is provided under the name of the MP or
>> candidate. It seems like an open and shut case to me. Whether the Liberal
>> Party qualifies as a non-profit organisation is another question entirely.

On Tue, Aug 17, 2004 at 04:07:17PM +1000, magic2147§optushome.com.au wrote:
> Strictly speaking a member of a parliament is NOT a representative
> of a political party but of the electors of a particular electoral
> division (or state in the case of a senator) so the argument you
> put forward was somewhat specious.

Yes, but practically speaking, and without wanting to debate
the constitutional issues, the MP (and especially a candidate) is
clearly an agent and representative of the party that endorses her,
which satisfies the requirement in the auDA policy. The fact that
an elected MP has other responsibilities is moot - an exclusive
relationship is not a pre-requisite for registering a domain.

In any case, if you accept that political representation is a
non-profit activity (the payment of the MP is not "profit"), all
we are discussing is which entities are allowed to claim a
relationship sufficient to satisfy the .org.au policy.

>> I argued this with auDA on behalf of another political party and 
>> eventually got them to agree to this interpretation and issue a
>> policy clarifying statement to registrars.

> Perhaps this suggests that we actually need a 
> nameofcandidate.nameofdivision.state.pol.au domain space.

gurk. But see www.parliament.wa.gov.au in the members section.
They have an mp.wa.gov.au domain and {name}§mp.wa.gov.au email
addresses, but not {name}.mp.wa.gov.au domains (yet).

> In any event why hasn't auDA spelt out the interpretation in the
> policy instead of keeping it a secret.

Ask them. For me, the policy is unambiguous and needs no
clarification.  That's not to say that the policy and its
application can't be improved.

Chris