David Goldstein [goldstein_david§yahoo.com.au] wrote:
> 
> --- Deus Ex Machina <vicc&#167;cia.com.au> wrote:
> 
> > the structure of the board is fundamentally flawed
> > and needs urgent repair.
> > 
> > auda is funded by com.au, without com.au there would
> > no
> > registry, registrars, resellers or viable domain
> > name space.
> > 
> 
> And Vic, without the "internet users" who access
> com.au names, there would be no "registry, registrars,
> resellers or viable domain name space."

well hold on. you seem to be somewhat confused as just who
the "supply" side is supposed to represent. which is it?
why should the suply side represent people who are only allowed
to buy in .id.au (which represents .001% of revenue)  as opposed to
businesses who represent 99.99% of revenue in .au?

what the public think about consenting private sales of .com.au is as relevant as what the
public think of a garage sale.

if 2 parties voluntarily decide they want to buy and sell a domain one of
them already owns then that is of no concern to anyone. these people
constitute the only relavent part of the public that needs any input.

there are zero public feel "good issues" about private sales of domains.

cybersquating is a separate issue that has no bearing whatsoever
on bipartisan consentual sales. attempts to intertwine this issue with
private sales are disengenous.

Vic