Land.com.au mysteriously drops for the fourth time this year.

Today, June 12th, auDA released a statement on their website regarding the reasoning behind Land.com.au dropping for the fourth time this year.

Although we believe this statement only appeared this morning, on the 12th June, auDA seem to have backdated the statement to 6th June;

In the link above, the following page is shown:


The above “reasoning” behind “why” auDA decided to place Land.com.au into Policy Delete basically remains a TOP SECRET and says NOT MUCH AT ALL.

When they say “The Panel accepts the submissions by the parties that the balance of the decision should not be published“, what does that even mean????

I’m very sure the initial party who submitted the complaint would never have agreed to HIDE and CONCEAL the details of the decision.

There have been many cases where Netfleet have been in trouble in the past (before Nikki was involved), where exact details have been publicly released.

Why not in this case?

auDA; please explain exactly WHY Land.com.au is dropping again today?

And while you’re at it, please explain how Company.com.au was secured in a highly disputable way, JUST LIKE LAND.com.au and by the SAME PEOPLE INVOLVED AS LISTED ABOVE, and you’re OKAY WITH IT?!

NOTE: The Company.com.au complaint has initially been DENIED by Steph Viljoen. We are currently escalating that complaint to an official INTERNAL REVIEW.

8 thoughts on “Land.com.au mysteriously drops for the fourth time this year.

  • Avatar
    June 12, 2019 at 11:17 am
    Permalink

    Land.com.au was won today by Drop.com.au for $50,000(.)

    Might be a good idea for Drop.com.au to change their $100,000 win for the domain listed on their website, that NEVER HAPPENED.

    Like
    Anonymous likes this.
    • Scott.L
      June 12, 2019 at 1:34 pm
      Permalink

      16.1 Except to the extent that a Registrant Review Panel in exceptional circumstances directs that any portion of its decision be redacted for publication, auDA must publish in full on its website each decision of a Registrant Review Panel.

      The entire decision was redacted?

      Whatever happened to accountability and transparency? The regulatory body looks more like a private company than an administrator acting on behalf of a public asset.

      I reckon all this secrecy Bullshit is more about protecting the reputation of their registrars than it is about protecting consumer rights.

      Let’s just go get a Starbucks Coffee and forget about it.

      Like
      3 people like this.
  • Avatar
    June 12, 2019 at 11:29 am
    Permalink

    “Although we believe this statement only appeared this morning, on the 12th June, auDA seem to have backdated the statement to 6th June”

    FYI: that post has been on the auDA website since at least 7 June 2019.

    Like
    Anonymous likes this.
  • Avatar
    June 12, 2019 at 12:17 pm
    Permalink

    “16.1 The Registrar Review Panel is entitled to publish its decision in full over the Internet, except when the Registrar Review Panel determines in exceptional case to redact portion of its decision.”

    It seems to me that every decision the panel makes has exceptional circumstances. What happened to transparency auDA.

    Like
    Anonymous likes this.
    • Avatar
      June 12, 2019 at 3:03 pm
      Permalink

      They amended this policy to the wording that Scott posted above. Which is even more of a joke because it shows even less transparency on auDA;s part.

      Like
      Anonymous likes this.
  • Avatar
    June 14, 2019 at 3:40 pm
    Permalink

    There’s been much questionable negative activity behind this closed auction process within Au’s Drop auction platforms. Via the ease of bid manipulation or business favouritism in order to capture and direct the ownership of top-level domain names for monetary worth or other, is an outside investigation long overdue. For gain, Insider Trading is a certain temptation and too often permitted within a badly regulated corruptible system. ASIC should be informed and an investigation is surely warranted for this domain name (Land.com.au) and many others.

    Like
    2 people like this.
  • Avatar
    June 25, 2019 at 7:33 pm
    Permalink

    The bidder that paid $50k. If the domain is disputed and it’s dropped again then they lose their money and that’s it?

    • Avatar
      June 25, 2019 at 7:40 pm
      Permalink

      Pretty much.

      I lost the initial amount of money I paid for OGIO.com.au on the drop platforms when the domain name was deleted from me. I then had to buy my own domain name back with a new amount of money!

      I guess that’s why you shouldn’t pay a lot of money for a domain name on the drop platforms unless you’re sure you’re entitled to it and know what you’re going to do with it.

      In this case, the bidder who Land.com.au at $50k definitely knows what he’s doing and is absolutely entitled to it. I don’t see him losing it for any reason. The universe would turn upside down if a generic domain name like “Land” was taken off someone over a silly complaint.

Comments are closed.