Our subject heading today is obviously a play on the famous line from the Fight Club movie when Brad Pitt says; “The first rule of fight club is… you DO NOT talk about Fight Club. The second rule of fight club is…”
In all seriousness though, it appears as though auDA does not want Domainer openly mentioning the name of its own Policy and Strategy Manager (Caroline Fritsch), even when it’s found that this senior auDA employee had effectively engaged in misleading a Government department.
auDA have sent a number of emails to Domainer over the past 5 weeks, in essence, passive-aggressively requesting Domainer not to talk about or mention auDA’s Policy and Strategy Manager, Caroline Fritsch.
Although I have been ignoring the emails from auDA CEO Rosemary Sinclair to date, they are starting to get quite annoying, so, for the sake of public interest for the domain investor and Australian entrepreneur community, I am now going to print below the numerous email requests from auDA asking Domainer not to talk about Caroline Fritsch.
But first, let’s get back up to date with how and why this is happening.
In her latest email (published below), auDA CEO Rosemary Sinclair states;
“I’ve had some recent feedback that a search using the name of one of auDA’s staff, Caroline Fritsch, brings up an article “auDA Manager breaches Code of Conduct”. auDA’s investigation of this matter concluded that the conduct did not breach auDA’s Code of Conduct. I would appreciate your action in removing the use of Caroline’s name in the links and metadata associated with the article on Domainer so that the potential risks to the individual are addressed.”
Well, first of all, I’d appreciate it if Rosemary could let me know WHO is giving her this feedback (“I’ve had some recent feedback“), because I’ve performed some search terms on various search engines and can’t seem to replicate what she’s finding for myself.
Second of all, the article contains Caroline Fritsch‘s name because the article is clearly about something Caroline Fritsch has done. So, I’m still not sure what the problem is?
Next, when Rosemary Sinclair states, “auDA’s investigation of this matter . . . did NOT breach auDA’s Code of Conduct“, what I believe and understand for her to really be saying is that she (Rosemary herself) personally decided that there was no breach of auDA’s Code of Conduct, so… that’s it… case closed, apparently?
Well… no, actually. I don’t think it’s “case closed” at all.
In my opinion, Rosemary Sinclair declaring that the Code of Conduct wasn’t breached by Caroline Fritsch doesn’t do it for me. In fact, I would suggest that auDA or an alternate external body should take another look into this. Perhaps Alan Cameron AO (auDA Chairperson) could take an objective look at all the facts? After all, he was once the Commonwealth Ombudsman!
In this previous article on Domainer (domainer.com.au/auda-ceo-tries-to-stifle-the-truth), Ned O’Meara published a letter from the auDA CEO that stated; “auDA’s new CEO (Rosemary Sinclair) has stifled truth, transparency and accountability,” by dismissing the complaint in the letter he wrote to Rosemary Sinclair (auDA CEO) on the 31st August.
I agree with Ned’s statement above.
Various questions to auDA still remain unanswered to this day in regards to all of the above.
Perhaps the most important question, is when Rosemary Sinclair stated that Caroline Fritsch did “not knowingly make misleading or untrue statements,” because Caroline Fritsch was given “information by a trusted third party that they believed to be true.”
WHO IS THE MYSTERIOUS TRUSTED THIRD PARTY who handed out UNTRUE STATEMENTS to Caroline Fritsch, who then just forwarded those untrue statements on to a government department with no due diligence, which was then unfortunately used against a rule-abiding domain investor from being allowed to own a generic three-letter acronym domain name, when he had already effectively been given permission to retain the domain name by the government body.
*** *** ***
Below you will find various emails sent to Domainer over the past 5 weeks requesting we remove all references to auDA Policy and Strategy Manager; Caroline Fritsch.
Here’s a public question for the CEO of auDA, Rosemary Sinclair.
How would you feel if you got stripped of an asset by someone who had fed incorrect information to a Government Department or other corporation?
Would you expect reparations and an apology? I know I would.
And contrary to what some at auDA think, domain investors and Australian entrepreneurs (who buy numbers of domains) are normal and law abiding people too.