[DNS] serious flaws in auda board structure

[DNS] serious flaws in auda board structure

From: Dassa <dassa§dhs.org>
Date: Sun, 25 Sep 2005 18:12:35 +1000
|> -----Original Message-----
|> From: dns-bounces+dassa=dhs.org&#167;dotau.org 
|> [mailto:dns-bounces+dassa=dhs.org&#167;dotau.org] On Behalf Of 
|> Deus Ex Machina
|> Sent: Sunday, September 25, 2005 9:04 AM
|> To: .au DNS Discussion List
|> Subject: [DNS] serious flaws in auda board structure
|> the structure of the board is fundamentally flawed and needs 
|> urgent repair.

You don't demonstrate how the structure is flawed.  The Board is made up of 3
supply, 3 demand and 3 rep assoc class members, I can't see how it could be
fairer than that.  What you are basically asking for is the Board to be
structered so the supply class is favoured and the Board is stacked in their
favour.  Now, that would be flawed.
|> auda is funded by com.au, without com.au there would no 
|> registry, registrars, resellers or viable domain name space.

It is a major part of the namespace that is for sure but not the complete
namespace.  Giving it more importance than it actually has doesn't prove

|> .com.au is a commercial name space which represents the 
|> absolute majority of names in the space. yet the "demand" 
|> position on the board in no way reflect the real buyers in 
|> the name space.

Stating such opinions as fact doesn't make them true.  You would need to prove

|> everytime an issue comes up, the "demand" people bring up 
|> the evil of registrar making money and the "feel good" 
|> astethic arguments despite the fact that the public in fact 
|> only buy around 100 domains a month out of something well 
|> over 10,000 .com.au names.

Businesses are part of the public also, Add into the equation future
purchasers and your current clients only make up a small percentage of the
overall users of the namespace, both current and in future. Personally I've
been requesting you to show how the changes you want would benefit the
namespace and you haven't responded with any evidence to support your demands.
There have been arguments against the changes you suggest that have been
reasoned and put forward politely.  On the other hand we have seen name
calling and baseless insults.

|> "public feel good" arguments are utterly irrelavent to a 
|> commercial name space, and should only be applied to .id.au.

I haven't seen any public feel good arguments.  Only structured responses to
the trangle of private opinion, insults and name calling I've seen from you.
Feel free to put forward your own structured arguments, evidence in support
and material to support your claims.  I'd be more than happy to consider them
and if compelling may change my own opinion.

|> I call on AUDA to reflect the reality of the name space in 
|> .au on the board, the demand places should be reserved for 
|> entities representing commercial bodies ie chambers of 
|> commerce etc, and not people representing an insignificant 
|> minority of name buyers infliciting blatent anti-commercial 
|> bias against the commercial name space.

Can you provide evidence of this alleged bias?  If not I suggest you try
another tack.

Darryl (Dassa) Lynch 
Received on Sun Sep 25 2005 - 08:12:35 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Sat Sep 09 2017 - 22:00:08 UTC