>_From: Scott Howard
> 
> I think it's time you (and several other people on this list) re-checked
> the com.au policies.
> The "dictionary word" stipulation hasn't been included in it for a year
> (well, 10 mins short of a year actually...).
> 
> As far as I can see, "diversified" isn't a 'generic word describing products
> (goods or services), industries, industry sectors, or organisations.'.

and why it gods name do we want this rule? so we can waste time explaining
to users that the lovely domain name they chose for themselves isnt prety enough
for the .com.au zone file.

> As for "dan", from a quick read of the rules, I cant see why this would be
> rejected (ignoring the "multiple domain" thing) - It probably streches
> a few of the rules, but I can't see any it actually breaks.

and why on earth do we want this "multiple domain rule" either?
why dont we just insist that companies must have names that rhyme too?

Vic