auDA Snippets

So much to talk about – and not enough time and space to devote to single articles. The simple solution is to get back to “snippets”.

Squeaky Door Gets The Oil

After some agitating on this blog – and a letter to the auDA Board from a couple of us, it looks like transparency is slowly starting to creep back onto the auDA website. Annual Reports and Cameron Ralph Report are now back up. As they should be.

Now we just need Minutes / Agendas etc …

Update on the Registry Transformation Project

auDA sent out another newsletter on the 5th May informing everyone that they are forging ahead with their desire to have a “built-in” registry.

What impresses me the most is who auDA have picked to lead the transformation. Dr Bruce Tonkin is a tremendous choice in my opinion. I’ve had the pleasure of being on a couple of auDA working groups with Bruce over the years – and have also dealt with him in his role as a Director of NetAlliance Pty Ltd (Netfleet). He is such a knowledgeable man when it comes to the “internet”. More importantly though, his integrity is second to none. He doesn’t seem to let office or organizational politics get in the way of giving straight answers. Let’s hope working for auDA doesn’t change that! ūüėČ

I had a long chat with Bruce yesterday, and he’s looking forward to a new direction after 19 years at Melbourne IT. Though I think it is fair to say that the updated scope of work that auDA has decided on has perhaps even surprised him.

Threats & Admonishments

Last week it was “suggested” to me by an auDA Director that I remove a particular comment (by one of my readers) because some on the auDA Board viewed it as defamatory. This was the article. I was told that if it wasn’t removed, then I should be prepared for legal action. I did delete the comment – I decided that whilst it wasn’t particularly offensive, it wasn’t worth “dying in the ditch” over.

Yesterday, I was told by an different auDA Director that “the way I have acted recently is disgusting”. No doubt referring to my various articles and audio on here. Ouch.

I was also accused of “cyber bullying” female Directors. Huh? I asked for clarification on this, but none was forthcoming. I hope they do suggest that publicly, because I would then have my own cause of action.

Don’t shoot the messenger auDA. This blog is read by over 50% of auDA Members (Supply & Demand) – plus Dept of Comms is a regular reader. Want to see the analytics? My advice would be to work with your Members and/or commentators rather than against them. But no doubt my advice will be simply laughed at.

What do my readers think about any of the above?

Ned O’Meara – 9th May 2017


Disclaimer

17 thoughts on “auDA Snippets

  • May 9, 2017 at 11:31 am
    Permalink

    AUDA should focus on the issue of transparency rather than trying to chase their own members and digging their heels on on easily solved issues.

    e.g. Why not simply put the minutes back up as clearly not many people agree with AUDA stated viewpoint?

    Is Ned the main target of AUDA “media” rules in its code of conduct? At the moment AUDA is working against its own membership base.

    Like
    8 people like this.
    • May 9, 2017 at 12:14 pm
      Permalink

      @Snoopy

      “Is Ned the main target of AUDA ‚Äúmedia‚ÄĚ rules in its code of conduct?”

      I fear this may well be the case.

      Like
      Anonymous likes this.
  • May 9, 2017 at 11:33 am
    Permalink

    What is disgusting is the supply side control over key national infrastructure and making decisions motivated by personal profit.

    Like
    5 people like this.
  • May 9, 2017 at 11:53 am
    Permalink

    Yesterday, I was told by an different auDA Director that ‚Äúthe way I have acted recently is disgusting‚ÄĚ. No doubt referring to my various articles and audio on here. Ouch.

    Being held publicly accountable is clearly uncomfortable for some people.

    Comments like that from auDA directors is very unprofessional. It’s not the first time that sort of vitriol has been dispensed either, which is quite concerning.

    It’s also worth stating the obvious, that domainer.com.au is not the only website to raise concerns about auDA, domainpulse.com and dntrade.com.au being some examples.

    Should other industry participants brace themselves for similar verbal sprays?

    Like
    8 people like this.
    • May 9, 2017 at 12:13 pm
      Permalink

      Thanks for your comment “Incognito”. Spot on in every regard.

      Like
      3 people like this.
  • May 9, 2017 at 12:02 pm
    Permalink

    “Last week it was ‚Äúsuggested‚ÄĚ to me by an auDA Director that I remove a particular comment (by one of my readers) because some on the auDA Board viewed it as defamatory.”

    The board made that decision? Did they meet last week? Or was one director bullshitting and bullying you.

    Like
    4 people like this.
    • May 9, 2017 at 12:07 pm
      Permalink

      “the auDA Board viewed it as defamatory.”

      That bit is quite bizarre. No wonder the minutes are hidden if this is what they are now spending their boardroom time on.

      Like
      3 people like this.
    • May 9, 2017 at 12:12 pm
      Permalink

      Sounds like a quick ring around happened between a few people, then they nominated someone whom I’m friendly with to ring me. And it wasn’t Tim.

      Yesterday’s blast came from a different Director.

      Like
      3 people like this.
      • May 9, 2017 at 12:49 pm
        Permalink

        I wonder if it was unanimous? he he

        Like
        4 people like this.
        • May 9, 2017 at 12:50 pm
          Permalink

          Wait for the next newsletter to find out.

          Like
          3 people like this.
  • May 9, 2017 at 1:10 pm
    Permalink

    It appears that some old auDA directors, even old auDA staff and others have befriended the global reputable organisation Transparency International.

    The Commonwealth Government is also a valid contact as they oversee auDA and have the power to even take over the role and monies from auDA if they so choose.

    http://www.transparency.org/what-is-corruption/#what-is-transparency

    “WHAT IS TRANSPARENCY?

    Transparency is about shedding light on rules, plans, processes and actions.

    It is knowing why, how, what, and how much.

    Transparency ensures that public officials, civil servants, managers, board members and business people act visibly and understandably, and report on their activities. And it means that the general public can hold them to account. It is the surest way of guarding against corruption, and helps increase trust in the people and institutions on which our futures depend.

    See how transparency can defeat corruption in a range of areas.”

    http://www.transparency.org/glossary/term/whistleblowing

    Whistleblowing

    Making a disclosure in the public interest by an employee, director or external person, in an attempt to reveal neglect or abuses within the activities of an organisation, government body or company (or one of its business partners) that threaten public interest, its integrity and reputation.

    _________

    What is the auDA  Transparency Policy? It needs to be on the auDA website with suitable contacts inside auDA and outside of it.

    What is the auDA Whistleblower Policy? It needs to be on the auDA website with suitable contacts inside auDA and outside of it.

     

    Like
    4 people like this.
  • May 9, 2017 at 1:55 pm
    Permalink

    The hole they are digging is getting bigger and bigger.

    Jeff

    Like
    4 people like this.
  • May 9, 2017 at 2:49 pm
    Permalink

    Hi Ned

    If all we have is a blog to convey the voice of debate about issues involving the DNS whilst auDA hides behind closed doors and whispers then, what message is that sending to its membership and the greater internet community.

     

    Like
    5 people like this.
  • May 9, 2017 at 3:06 pm
    Permalink

    I agree with Scott.
    Where’s the conversation and unity?¬†Why should there be a ‘them” and “us” feeling about the whole thing?

    Like
    6 people like this.
  • May 9, 2017 at 3:41 pm
    Permalink

     

    To echo Snoopy’s comments elsewhere, thank you Ned for your coverage on auDA. Clearly your posts have hit the mark, judging by the veiled threats and insults. Illegitimi non carborundum.

     

    Like
    5 people like this.
  • May 9, 2017 at 6:38 pm
    Permalink

    The thing is, businesses and organisations sometimes do the wrong thing. This is due to the fact that they are made up of “humans” pulling the strings. And we all know humans aren’t perfect. Sometimes mistakes are made.

    When customers or¬†industry colleagues call the company on the mistakes, there are obviously two ways to go…

    1. Take offence and ignore the criticism.

    2. Take the high ground, learn from the negative criticism and turn it into a positive for the company.

    I think auDA are moving forward (in general, as an organisation), and have some great new and old people involved in steering the ship, but some individual representatives seem to be¬†choosing option¬†number 1 lately (which is Netfleet’s favourite and default option!!), instead of option¬†number 2.

    It can be very simple, yet some people (individually) find the options very hard to comprehend.

    Like
    2 people like this.
  • May 10, 2017 at 10:47 am
    Permalink

    It’s a great shame to hear that Ned. ¬†I know you’re thick skinned enough to take on their “feedback”, however it doesn’t feel like the right way to¬†operate.

    The board and management that we saw at the last AGM seems a world away from what we’re seeing now…

    The feeling of “us v them” is stronger than ever, and it just doesn’t have to be that way.

    Like
    4 people like this.

Comments are closed.