On Wed, Jul 18, 2007 at 06:46:12PM +0000, Kim Davies wrote: [ ... ]
> To take a personal example, when I started participating in auDA -- > which I did out of personal interest -- my employer at the time was > an ISP where I worked in systems development. In this role I didn't > touch domain retailing services (back then as a reseller of M-IT) for > customers. Today under these rules presumably I would be banned from > being on the auDA Board. Is that fair or appropriate? from: Annexure to EGM Notice - Explanatory Memorandum http://www.auda.org.au/document.php?documentid=927 Employees who hold less than 5% of the total number of votes attached to the shares in the .au domain name Supply entity (.au Registry/.au Registrar/.au Reseller) are permitted to be a Demand Class Director. [...] > Perhaps we need to reconsider different models of demand membership > of auDA if the risk of capture is that great. I don't know what the > current update of demand membership is like, but it might benefit from > some elements of the new CIRA model (see > http://www.cira.ca/en/membership/about.html) where any domain holder > can have free annual enrollment as a member. I think this type of idea has merit. Each demand class person hould only entitled to one membership regardless of whether they have 1 or 1000 .au domains. Josh -- http://josh.id.au/ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- List policy, unsubscribing and archives => http://dotau.org/
