Ruining the industry, by providing legal aggressive competition?
That is capitalism as opposed to communism/cartel setups.

Advertising to your clients is bound to make you angry, but that's
capitalism if you don't like capitalism maybe you would prefer to live in a
communist country.


Why don't you guys all join forces with the aim to prevent
competition/capitalism.


Brad



----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Marty Drill - Domain Candy" <marty&#167;domaincandy.com.au>
To: <dns&#167;dotau.org>
Sent: Friday, March 19, 2004 1:26 PM
Subject: RE: [DNS] Brad Norrish's auDA


> I am going to break the ban already and respond to this
>
> You question money spent on quote "the high amounts spent by Auda on
> expenses such as CEO wages and staff training". What about all the money
> spent on legal bills.
>
> Maybe you should get elected, sack the staff and spend all the money on
> legal bills for scoundrels ruining our industry.
>
> Sorry to the rest of the list.
>
> Marty
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Brad Norrish [mailto:brad&#167;brad.com.au]
> Sent: Friday, 19 March 2004 4:14 PM
> To: dns&#167;dotau.org
> Subject: Re: [DNS] Brad Norrish's auDA
>
> Even though your arguments are slightly flawed Mark it's good to see
> somebody stick up for Auda with some intelligence. A far cry from the
Duuh's
> and Eh's very valid points have been responded to in the past or even
worse
> offenders just putting their head in the sand.
>
> The result of having a cartel type setup from an economic theory viewpoint
> would be higher than necessary pricing for the consumer and registration
> conditions favouring the members of Auda rather than the registrant. .au
> pricing is higher than those of common trading partners and it is highly
> arguable that reg conditions do favour Auda over non auda members when
> compared to policies of other countries
>
> There would also be an economic distortion towards money being spent by
Auda
> being greater than expected. This is also highly arguable with the high
> amounts spent by Auda on expenses such as CEO wages and staff training.
>
> There is very little political motive for the govt to want to handle the
> regulation - even if it is the correct model. The distortions created from
> an economic theory viewpoint would disadvantage the average registrant
prob
> equivalent of only few dollars per year - hardly enough for them to sway
> their political preferences - even if they did understand, and definitely
> not enough to crack a mention at election time.
>
>
> Brad
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Mark Hughes" <effectivebusiness&#167;applications.com.au>
> To: <dns&#167;dotau.org>
> Sent: Thursday, March 18, 2004 4:41 PM
> Subject: RE: [DNS] Brad Norrish's auDA
>
>
> > > In reality regulation should be handled by a govt department.
> >
> > > The only reason Auda's function is not controlled by the govt is
legacy
> >
> > As those of us who have been involved in the "who should regulate the
.au
> > namespace" issue for many years know (but those with more recent
> involvement
> > may not be aware)....
> >
> > The number one reason auDA's function is not controlled by the
government
> is
> > that the government considered the issues, and decided that auDA's
> function
> > should NOT be controlled by the government.  This was a conscious
decision
> > on behalf of the Australian Federal Government.
> >
> > You don't have to take my word for this - or auDA's, or anyone else's
> word.
> > Ask the government about this, and they'll tell you.
> >
> > As the Australian government for the last 8 years has philosophically
been
> a
> > strong believer in "less government is good government", they pushed the
> > Australian community to take on the task of setting up a Regulatory
> > Authority for the .au namespace.
> >
> > Some people may feel the government did the right thing to not take on
the
> > job itself; others may feel the government made the wrong decision.
> >
> > But its unlikely the existing government will reverse its decision.
> >
> > My personal opinion is that even if at a subsequent election a party
with
> > more faith in "government having a larger role" were to come to power,
> they
> > would be reluctant to alter the .au namespace status quo unless there
was
> a
> > helluva clear case that there is a major problem with the existing
system.
> >
> >
> >
> > Regards, Mark
> >
> > Mark Hughes
> > Effective Business Applications Pty Ltd
> > +61 4 1374 3959
> > www.pplications.com.au
> > effectivebusiness&#167;applications.com.au
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Brad Norrish [mailto:brad&#167;brad.com.au]
> > Sent: Thursday, 18 March 2004 1:01 PM
> > To: dns&#167;dotau.org
> > Subject: Re: [DNS] Brad Norrish's auDA
> >
> >
> > As promised my overview of how the regulation system is in need of
change,
> a
> > bit shorter than expected but a suitable length for the list I feel.
> >
> > The recent type of responces to the list serve as evidence to support my
> > theories on the current domain regulation system.
> >
> > I agree with leading economic experts and current economic theory that
> there
> > is a fundamental problem in any economic model where supply of a good or
> > service is regulated or controlled by a group of suppliers.
> >
> > A cartel by definition is : A combination of independent business
> > organizations formed to regulate production, pricing, and marketing of
> goods
> > by the members.
> >
> > The difference between a cartel and the current Auda system is that
Auda's
> > control is broken down into 3 sections : supply, demand and association.
> >
> > BUT if effectively the demand and association representation is
controlled
> > by suppliers or those under the influence of suppliers the model reverts
> > back to effectively be a cartel.
> >
> > The problem is further worsened by the Auda board being voted in by
> members
> > of Auda, not those effectively forming the demand market.
> >
> > Really there is little benefit for the average domain purchaser to be a
> > member of Auda so fair adequate representation of the demand class is
not
> > achieved.
> >
> > In reality regulation should be handled by a govt department. With the
> push
> > in recent years to privatise everything possible there has been no
> proposal
> > whatsoever to privatise business name regulation or company name
> > regulation - because it's not the best model - doesn't work.
> >
> > The only reason Auda's function is not controlled by the govt is legacy
to
> > the formation of the system - it doesnt mean it is currently the right
> > system going forward into the following decades. There are very few
> > political votes in changing the system because domain purchasers
> > individually don't care enough and the majority of suppliers are content
> to
> > make a living with the system as it is - don't rock the boat if you are
> > making a buck in the current system.
> >
> > In reality if the govt had control the regulation could be stricter -
they
> > wouldn't have to regulate within the trade practises act as Auda does.
> >
> > To cut down on postings I will only respond to those who show an
> > intelligent, informed grasp of the economic theory I've based this post
> on.
> >
> >
> >
> > Brad
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "David Sexton" <david&#167;dscomputing.au.com>
> > To: <dns&#167;dotau.org>
> > Sent: Wednesday, March 17, 2004 6:55 PM
> > Subject: Re: [DNS] Brad Norrish's auDA
> >
> >
> > > I'm in agreement with Sean.
> > >
> > > I'm on this list for the sole purpose of relevant discussion about
DNS -
> > > something that keeps my business together. Whilst I don't mind seeing
> > plenty
> > > of related posts, I'm seeing a huge amount of rubbish. Add that to
> similar
> > > problems on a few other mailing lists, and I seem to be deleting an
> awful
> > lot
> > > of trash. I don't post on mailing lists very often, I don't need to,
but
> > damn
> > > it, this is way, way, way past a joke.
> > >
> > > The only useful Brad Norrish related posts on this list are when we're
> > told
> > > about some other *business venture* that is concerning our customers.
> > >
> > > Other than that, I really don't think we need to be discussing him, or
> > > receiving any posts not directly relevant to DNS.
> > >
> > > So, here's a theory. If everyone stops replying to, and quoting from
> Brads
> > > posts, we'll be ignoring him. If we ignore him long enough, he'll shut
> up.
> > > And if that doesn't work, then perhaps we should look at ignoring
> everyone
> > > who insists on making things worse by arguing with him as well.....
> > > At least this way, we wouldn't be banning him...
> > >
> > > Brad, and a few other people on this list seem to be Trolls. For those
> who
> > > don't remember the rules we used to use on usenet... Don't feed the
> > trolls.
> > >
> > > Let's get this list back on track people......
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > > David
> > > (climbing back in hole....)
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wed, 17 Mar 2004 05:14 pm, sean.finn wrote:
> > > > This is a public plea to clean up this list. It has turned into a
cess
> > > > pool again.
> > > >
> > > > chmod 444 ./offending_party_ability_to_participate_in_this_list
> > > >
> > > > (I.E. Read only).
> > > >
> > > > Please ask yourself before posting if your post is either
> > > > a) constructive, or
> > > > b) humourous(?).
> > > > If it is negative, please do not post.
> > > > If it is inflamatory, please do not post.
> > > >
> > > > Should we rename the list the DNS-SH!T-SLINGING-LIST ? or is it to
be
> > > > kept the DNS-DISCUSSION-LIST.
> > > >
> > > > I am interested in
> > > > a) DNS Discussion for positive gain.
> > > > b) Discussion about Domain Names, Both Australian And Global, as it
is
> > > > my assumption as this list is populated mainly By Australians /
> > > > Aus-Pacific parties, and .au and other domains (may) impact on this
> > > > region differnetly than other parts of the world. (i.e. a geographic
> > > > interest group)
> > > > c) Technical Discussion about policy / regulation.
> > > > d) Being alerted of breaches of policy, companies involved, and
> > > > discussion about this.
> > > > e) All of the above to be conducted in a couteous manner parallel
with
> > > > the privilege of your position in the domain industry.
> > > > F) Regular News articles. (Good value).
> > > > g) other related happenings in the industry (Yes, in fact, the
mailed
> > > > out notices are part of this, and i consider good value, so that
when
> > > > our clients ring, we can tell them to read closely)
> > > >
> > > > Do I care if someone is going to whoop skeeve's wifes shopping
budget
> to
> > > > caress your ego / "emotional damages" or whatever, heck no, unless
> that
> > > > party has registered imgunnawhoopskeeve.com.au and its doesn't fit
> into
> > > > .au policy.
> > > >
> > > > Cheers
> > > > Sean Finn
> > > > www.ozservers.com.au
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > -
> > > List policy, unsubscribing and archives => http://dotau.org/
> > > Please do not retransmit articles on this list without permission of
the
> > > author, further information at the above URL.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> -
> > List policy, unsubscribing and archives => http://dotau.org/
> > Please do not retransmit articles on this list without permission of the
> > author, further information at the above URL.
> >
> >
> >
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> -
> > List policy, unsubscribing and archives => http://dotau.org/
> > Please do not retransmit articles on this list without permission of the
> > author, further information at the above URL.
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
> List policy, unsubscribing and archives => http://dotau.org/
> Please do not retransmit articles on this list without permission of the
> author, further information at the above URL.
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
> List policy, unsubscribing and archives => http://dotau.org/
> Please do not retransmit articles on this list without permission of the
> author, further information at the above URL.
>
>
>