Think of the savings that would be made by not trying to enforce so many subjective policies. There are so many areas that are not clearly defined in some of these polices (eg misspelling, monetisation to name a couple). Grey areas just means one party is going to always feel disgruntled and often means the dispute is protracted. You also get the case where people argue relatively trivial matters as a matter of principle which is a real time-waster Cheers David Lye Trivial complaint can risk causing a protracted dispute where yo -----Original Message----- From: dns-bounces+davidlye=privatefleet.com.au§dotau.org [mailto:dns-bounces+davidlye=privatefleet.com.au§dotau.org] On Behalf Of dns-request§dotau.org Sent: Thursday, 14 October 2010 6:00 AM To: dns§dotau.org Subject: DNS Digest, Vol 63, Issue 5 Send DNS mailing list submissions to dns§dotau.org To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://lists.cynosure.com.au/mailman/listinfo/dns or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to dns-request§dotau.org You can reach the person managing the list at dns-owner§dotau.org When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of DNS digest..." Today's Topics: 1. Re: 2010 auDA Election (Kim Davies) 2. Re: 2010 auDA Election (Brett Fenton) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2010 19:21:54 -0700 From: Kim Davies <kim§cynosure.com.au> To: dns§dotau.org Subject: Re: [DNS] 2010 auDA Election Message-ID: <20101013022154.GA2543§cynosure.com.au> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Hi all, I wrote: | | 1. The _reduction of domain name prices_ ??? by reducing auDA???s fee to | | Registrars; | | What impact would this have on auDA's programmes, budget or | expenditure? Are there specific services auDA performs that should be reduced to accommodate this? | ... I have received a number of responses to this email, all off list - not from the candidate but from other members. It is a shame there is no open discussion about these kind of issues, because I think it is useful to discuss the future of .au and how it can improve. That is why this list was created. However, one person took exception and thinks that I shared privileged conversations that should be kept private. Their view is that candidates should not have to answer questions from members, and that the material they spam to members to ask them to elect them are confidential communications. What kind of accountability is this? I am dumbfounded. kim ------------------------------ Message: 2 Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2010 14:56:27 +1100 From: Brett Fenton <brett.fenton§netregistry.com.au> To: dns§dotau.org Subject: Re: [DNS] 2010 auDA Election Message-ID: <201010131456.27706.brett.fenton§netregistry.com.au> Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="us-ascii" Hi Kim, I don't have an opinion on the discuss/not discuss view and the publication of an email, if Erhan is okay with it being discussed in public then that would be good enough for me. I would make some comment on reduction on costs / opex however whether that spurs discussion or not. In my own personal view (and I'm speaking as an individual not in my capacity of working in a Registrar), I think the travel line in the auDA budgets is not only excessive it's obscene. auDA while I was on the board made a commitment that if auCD wasn't financially viable after the initial cash injection from the generic domain auctions, that the program would be rolled up. Well the money is exhausted and all that's happened is that auDA have absorbed the ongoing costs and it's business as usual. To an outside observer there seems to be no competive tender process to auDA for the provision of ongoing contract services, legals as one example. I certainly think that the board as part of their corporate governance should be looking at the entire opex budget for auDA regardless of whether this ultimately lowers domain pricing or not. Though on the issue of domain pricing it is my understanding that each registration now contributes 25c to the auDA foundation. Which I think in and of itself is scandalous. I would welcome some healthy community debate around these and any other items, whether you happen to agree with my particular point of view or not. Regards, Brett Fenton. > Hi all, > > I wrote: > | | 1. The _reduction of domain name prices_ ??? by reducing > | | auDA???s fee to > | | > | | Registrars; > | > | What impact would this have on auDA's programmes, budget or expenditure? > | Are there specific services auDA performs that should be reduced to > | accommodate this? ... > > I have received a number of responses to this email, all off list - not > from the candidate but from other members. It is a shame there is no open > discussion about these kind of issues, because I think it is useful to > discuss the future of .au and how it can improve. That is why this list > was created. > > However, one person took exception and thinks that I shared privileged > conversations that should be kept private. Their view is that candidates > should not have to answer questions from members, and that the material > they spam to members to ask them to elect them are confidential > communications. > > What kind of accountability is this? I am dumbfounded. > > kim > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ --- > List policy, unsubscribing and archives => http://dotau.org/ ------------------------------ _______________________________________________ DNS mailing list DNS§dotau.org http://lists.cynosure.com.au/mailman/listinfo/dns End of DNS Digest, Vol 63, Issue 5 **********************************Received on Wed Oct 13 2010 - 19:21:27 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Sat Sep 09 2017 - 22:00:10 UTC