> -----Original Message-----
> From: Brad Norrish [mailto:brad§brad.com.au] 
> Sent: Tuesday, 9 March 2004 1:29 PM
> To: dns§lists.auda.org.au
> Subject: Re: [DNS] Brad Norrish's auDA
> 
> I went to print www.whatsinaname.com.au/slammers only to my 
> amusement find it was 53 pages long.  However when you are 
> asked a few short questions about your fundamental 
> suitability to be on the auda board you are repeatedly unable 
> to answer.

What?? Is this the first time that you've actually looked at the information
that you so roundly condemn?

> 
>  
> 
> This lack of ability by an auda director to answer a couple 
> of simple, intelligent very relevant direct questions is not 
> only embarrassing to the auda but the Australian domain 
> industry. It's far from the first time you've put your head 
> in the sand like a terrified cowardly ostrich when facing 
> issues you don't like to address.

I hardly think that going public on consumer deception and publishing 53
pages on www.whatsinaname.com.au/slammers is "cowardly" and "putting your
head in the sand" as you state. 

>  
> 
> Now on your last post you've attempted to dodge my question 
> by asking me a vague, broad reaching question about 
> initiating an industry body. Despite this huge ask I will 
> answer your question. 
> 
>  
> 
> I am quite busy at the moment and it may be a few days before 
> I post but I have a clear, logical view of how the Australian 
> domain industry regulation really should work and why. In the 
> meantime here is a list of basic questions including some 
> that I believe you will find it necessary to avoid answering 
> with any logic. 

Judging from the content of this post it will be much more than a few days
before you even come close to a "clear, logical view"

> 
> 
> 
> Why are you representing the "demand class" when in fact you 
> are a supplier? 

He was duly elected to that that position, having chosen to accept
nomination and to being scrutinised by his peers.  You too could do the
same.

> 
> 
> Did you realize that you were actually a SUPPLIER of domains 
> running a company that sells domain names and related 
> services when you went up for election to represent the 
> "DEMAND CLASS"?

Duhh.


>  
> 
> Do you understand why the board is broken up into 3 
> categories (+ independants + CEO)? Why is that?

Check on the auDA constitution - it's all public information

>  
> 
> If Auda is unable to get a true representation for the 
> "demand class" without a conflict of interest (by the 
> representative actually being involved in the supply side) do 
> you agree that there is a real problem with the current auda system?

What conflict of interest?  Why aren't you putting yourself forward for
election, then - or can't you find members to nominate / second you?.  Do
you suggest, with your "entrapment" type contracts, that you are qualified
to represent the interests of consumers?

> 
>  
> 
> If Auda and the board was dominated by suppliers can you see 
> cartel type powers existing within the current model used? 

No

>  
> 
> Why wouldn't the model be dominated by suppliers when there 
> is such little benefit to be involved in auda for the average 
> Joe Australian domain holder?

Eh???

> 
>  
> 
> Do you think the current model is just when a particular 
> competitor can act as both competitor and regulator, if not 
> what are you currently doing to fix it?

What do you mean, "a particular competitor can act as both competitor and
regulator"?  Please elaborate, as your proposition doesn't make sense -
especially in that the domain name regime is one of self regulation.

> 
>  
> 
> As .au "demand class" representative (looking after the 
> interests of those in demand for .au domains) why are com.au 
> domains so much more expensive than .us .co.uk and co.nz 
> country code domains? Is it because auda is poorly run 
> compared to the industry bodies of other countries or because 
> such a large amount is paid to Ausregistry?

Is that an accusation or question?  It's interesting that in many respects
auDA is in fact considered to be a world leader, particularly in respect of
its Codes of Conduct.

Have you agreed to be bound by their terms and conditions?

> 
>  
> 
> Ausregistry has been enabled by the deal to both achieve 
> astounding profits and gain such great market positioning for 
> international growth. This is at the same time as wholesale 
> rates paid for .au domains far exceed that of the above 
> countries. Why wasn't Auda able to gain a better deal for the 
> Australian domain holder? (This is particularly interesting 
> with your passion with domain name pricing)

I should have thought that dropping domain prices from $200-odd to $70-odd
is getting a better deal for registrants.  Eliminating players who slam
unsuspecting consulers and deceive them into paying exhorbitant prices is
also getting them a better deal.

Perhaps you were still in school or something when AusRegistry won their
role in a public tender process.  By definition, then, the "losers" in that
process were not offering as good a deal to industry participants.

It's a wonderful thing, a competitive market.  Create competion, achieve
market penetration and hey presto!  Sales and profits go up.

The other phenomenon in a free market is that greater volumes translate to
lower prices - something entrenched in AusRegistry's contract in any case.
Perhaps when Australia' domain population reaches that of USA we'll see $20
domain names as well.

A suggestion for you.  When AusRegistry's contract comes up for renewal next
year, why don't you submit a tender to run things your way?


> 
>  
> 
> Have you ever personally used the same lawyers as auda? If 
> yes can you confirm that you have you been billed separately 
> to auda for these personal matters?

auDA's accounts are open to member scrutiny.

> 
> 
> 
> **My wild guess** the most interesting thing about your next 
> post will be the method used to avoid these questions**My wild guess**

If you're already predicting an outcome, why bother with this post in the
first place?  After all, by your own admission, you are "quite busy"

> 
> 
> 
> Even if/when you fail miserably to answer these above 
> questions I will publish my view of how the Australian domain 
> industry should be regulated

As you wish.  Funny, though, that your voice was silent when so many calls
for public comment and submissions were being made.

> 
> 
> 
> If you can't answer find somebody more intelligent to stick a 
> fist up your back. and you just be a ventriloquist doll.

Duhh!!


> 
>  
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Brad
>