At 10:16 AM 5/14/98 +1000, Kate Lance wrote:
>> http://www.adna.asn.au/Minutes/April1998.html
>
>It's not a major point but I have already pointed out in email on the 
>draft of these minutes that Action A20 is not correct.  It currently reads:
>
>A20 Luke Carruthers reported he had begun communications with ISOC-AU 
>    concerning participating in ADNA.
>
>I made clear at the meeting that this has *not* happened.  ISOC-AU
>formally requested ADNA on February 16th to re-open the communication
>that had been broken off by ADNA in December 1997.  ISOC-AU received no
>reply to that request and have had no further discussion with ADNA apart
>from attending this board meeting.
>

Hi Kate
I did amend the earlier version, which stated that communication had begun,
to the current version in response to your earlier email.
As there is clearly a difference in viewpoint between Luke and yourself on
the facts of the matter, I believe that the current statement in the
Minutes, "Luke Carruthers reported he had begun communications with ISOC-AU
...", is quite factually correct, without exercising judgment on who is
correct.
My own impression is that you are both correct, because you are applying
different criteria - Luke was referring to an informal conversation he had
had with Geoff to re-open the dialogue, whereas you were expecting
re-opening of the formal dialogue with yourself, which clearly didn't happen.

I suggest that we all move on from the unhappy past, and put this behind
us. Hopefully NOIE will accept ADNA's recent request for help, and will act
as midwife to the birth of a restructured and improved ADNA that can act
with good support from all sections of the industry: the historical DNAs,
the end-users (directly and through their industry sector associations),
the ISPs (both as intermediaries for end-users, and as major users of the
DNS), and other organisations wishing to become Registrars within .au.

Regards
Peter Gerrand
Secretary, ADNA