Poorly is the answer! auDA keep digging themselves such an unnecessary hole with regards transparency and communication with its members.
It wouldn’t hurt the Board one iota to have a quick ring around, and agree to restore the previous history of the organisation. Then the increasing agitation would be over and done with. “The Board listened to the concerns raised by its Members; and acted accordingly”. What great PR!
Apples & Oranges
They need to compare themselves with their peer organisations when it comes to transparency and communication – rather than the ABC or CSIRO as I wrote yesterday!
What do I mean by peer organisations? In simple terms, the statutory authority or regulator who controls domain name registrations in other countries.
Just for starters, auDA operates under the auspices of ICANN – have a read of this auDA article which sets out the original relationship.
ICANN is a squillion times bigger than auDA, and yet it has full transparency. Agendas, Minutes – even audio recordings!
Then let’s also look at other jurisdictions as well – New Zealand, Canada, and the UK.
♦ Does ICANN have transparency? Yes.
♦ Does Nominet (UK) have transparency? Yes.
♦ Does DNC (New Zealand) have transparency? Yes.
♦ Does CIRA (Canada) have transparency? Yes.
Let’s Compare Canada With Australia
I’m not talking policy differences – just how they interact with their members.
They have a bigger population than Australia, but slightly less domain names registered. As at today (according to AusRegistry), we have around 3,122,000 domains – Canada has approximately 2,615,000. So comparable in my opinion.
I’ll let these pictures tell the story of how they treat their members compared to Australia. Quite simply, there is a fantastic level of communication and transparency which auDA should try and emulate. Not only do CIRA communicate with their members on so many levels, they allow members to communicate back via a variety of channels.
We can’t let those Canuck’s beat us!
Image 1 – look at the level of information and connectivity they offer their members.
Image 2 – CIRA’s Twitter account – look how many tweet’s and followers they have.
Image 3 – auDA’s Twitter account by comparison. (They’ve rarely re-tweeted any of my posts even when I praise their efforts!)
Image 4 – CIRA’s Facebook account (4,180 followers).
auDA doesn’t even have a Facebook page – only one for the auDA Foundation – 127 followers! Last post February 27th.
CIRA Also Has The Following:
♦ A LinkedIn account with 1818 followers!
♦ An Instagram account – but that’s not very popular yet.
♦ Blogs that are regularly updated – even the CEO has a blog!
♦ And I forgot to mention that you can view their website in English or French!
Really simple auDA. Please get your act together – communication and transparency with members is paramount. The Canadians (and ICANN, UK and NZ) have shown you the way.
“Hiding” past history invites ridicule. And one email newsletter per month (with no ability for members to answer back or ask questions) is simply inadequate in this day and age.
If the CEO can’t make this happen properly despite his promises, then he should really consider his position. In my opinion of course.
Ned O’Meara – 31st May 2017