It’s Not Just Me auDA!

For those out there that think I’m on a solo mission to discredit auDA (in particular its Chair and CEO), then I have to tell you I’m not alone.

Other more esteemed publications than mine are writing articles about the current shenanigans at auDA.

Yesterday, David Goldstein from DomainPulse wrote an interesting article which raised serious questions about potential or perceived conflicts of interest between Cameron Boardman (CEO) and Dr Michaella Richards. This situation needs to be clarified.

The day prior to that, he wrote these two articles:

♦ ICANN Commits to Transparency, auDA Despises It

♦ auDA Members Revolt Against Management as Chair Faces Ousting

About David Goldstein

For those that may think “what would he know”, I can tell you he is far more knowledgeable about the worldwide domain industry than many of us put together!

He was also an auDA Board member (2005 to 2007), served on 3 auDA Names Policy Panels (2007, 2010 and 2015), and was a supplier to auDA for 14 years.  He is now a supplier to AusRegistry proving online media monitoring services and contributing to the Behind the Dot magazine.

I haven’t always agreed with David on some of the issues he has championed in the past (like direct registrations), and we’ve had some “spirited” discussions. Despite that, I do believe him to be a person of absolute integrity.

We are in total sync with regards the current lack of communication and transparency at auDA – and are both great believers in proper processes and procedures being followed (regardless of whether the ultimate outcome suits our personal interests).

Ned O’Meara 27th July 2017


4 thoughts on “It’s Not Just Me auDA!

  • Avatar
    July 27, 2017 at 1:45 pm

    This changes everything.

    Anyone who gets a job at auDA when they have had no history of owning any domain names, have not been involved in the industry, have not been a member . . . is clearly doing it for the cash incentive.

    Why do the powers that be at the time employ people like this? I think we have just witnessed a possible reason.

    Sure, a lot of people have to work to pay for the roof over their head, but there are other jobs out there for someone who just wants to work for money.

    Wouldn’t it be better to have people in charge who actually CARE about the industry they are regulating and representing? Who respect the roots of how the industry was created in the first place whilst ensuring the future of the industry is protected, instead of being manipulated for an alternative negative outcome?

    A massive change at auDA is not only necessary, it’s imminent.

    4 people like this.
    • Avatar
      July 27, 2017 at 2:06 pm

      People need not have experience with or knowledge of domain names to be employed at auDA. There are many skills needed and much of the knowledge around domain names can be learned, particularly for non-management roles. The board is a different matter. It would be highly unlikely for someone to get elected with little or no knowledge from supply or demand classes. For independent directors, while it would be much, even infinitely, better to have someone with a strong interest in and knowledge of domain names, there are other skills and knowledge needed, such as security

      6 people like this.
    • Avatar
      July 27, 2017 at 2:11 pm

      Anyone who gets a job at auDA when they have had no history of owning any domain names, have not been involved in the industry, have not been a member . . . is clearly doing it for the cash incentive.

      As a developer/tech I was interested in the development and security aspect of the job – the money wasn’t any better than any other development job I could be in – and until I was at auDA I didn’t have a .au domain (I do have others).

      The staff prior to 2017 were there because they cared but I cannot comment on existing staff (I don’t know them)

      Please don’t tar all staff with the same brush.

      8 people like this.
      • Ned O'Meara
        July 28, 2017 at 4:59 am

        @Aaron and @David

        In defense of Robert, I think he was referring to the CEO and Michaella Richards (David singled these two out in his DomainPulse article). Certainly not the staff.

        Cheers, Ned

        3 people like this.

Comments are closed.