> 
> Bruce, thank you for answering the first part, but i think 
> you missed the
> second part :
> 
> auDA is well aware of the business practices of these 
> companies and yet here
> THEY SIT ON THE CODE OF CONDUCT COMMITEE
> 

Well auDA operates a model of industry self-regulation.  These means that
all members of the industry (and members of auDA) may participate.

The theoretical idea is that the industry will be willing to abide by the
code of conduct if it has a hand in developing it.  Now if a small minority
of members of the committee disagree with a particular code of conduct
proposal becuase it affects their business model, it is up to them to
justify against the majority how the intersts of end users will be served by
not including the proposal.

So I see no problem with a range of views (the good side and the dark side)
being discussed - we do live in a democracy.  The other approach - an auDA
or government dictatorship  - is not one I favour.  I think auDA is taking
the right approach, and I see no evidence that the code of conduct has been
compromised by allowing a range of views to be expressed.  

You could have also applied to join the committee and be constructive.  My
approach is that if I am not happy with something, I work constructively to
try to change things for the better.  

I continue to monitor this list, because there are still some dedicated
individuals on it that have constructive things to say amongst the noise.

Regards,
Bruce Tonkin