auDA Director, Mr Tim Connell, has today announced his resignation from the auDA Board. Mr Connell, a demand class Director since 2016, said he did not support the Board’s majority position of admitting new members in line with the auDA Constitution and the requirements of the federal government review. The Board would like to thank Mr Connell for his services over his term and appreciated his work on behalf of the organisation. Under the auDA constitution (19.7) a casual vacancy shall be filled within three calendar months of the vacancy occurring (or such longer period as the Board may otherwise resolve) by the remaining Directors.
Domain Names, News
Tim Connell Leaves auDA Board
auDA have publicly released a statement saying Tim Connell has resigned as a board member:
It couldn’t have been easy, Tim, being an auDA board member whilst publicly advocating for domainer, domain name investors and small-business domain name owners’ rights.
Thanks for your contribution during your time and I wish you all the best moving forward.
Tim explains some of the difficulties faced in his resignation letter:
https://www.timconnell.com.au/tim-connell.pdf
“While Mr Connell is certainly entitled to his viewpoint, at the recent Special General Meeting auDA’s top-tier legal firm, Ashurst, confirmed that the provisions of the Constitution do not allow the board to reject the new members”… http://theluckygeneral.biz/2018/08/07/to-have-and-to-hold-the-latest-on-auda-reform/
Laurie where has Ashurst written that exactly?
You are peddling pure B.S. for Afilias who is paying you and who had participated in the stacking.
https://www.dntrade.com.au/threads/branch-stacking.11943
https://www.itwire.com/strategy/83779-four-domain-vendors-control-70-of-auda-membership-claim.html
https://www.dntrade.com.au/threads/auda-org-au-propaganda-machine-is-wearing-thin-with-members.11876/
Where is your disclaimer you are paid by Afilias the auDA Subcontractor?
Laurie, please would you and/or another auDA or Affilias representative address all the points mentioned in Tim’s resignation letter? Here is a link to points and the recent developments of great concern:
https://www.timconnell.com.au/tim-connell.pdf
1. Ashurst lawyers were at the SGM and confirmed that advice in response to a question from the floor.
2. You are peddling bile that isn’t helping the cause of reform.
3. Did you read my article? It contains my disclosure statement.
1. Putting the claimed Ashurt advice to one side, was it a moral decision based on good governance, and/or a decision made in the best interest of the majority of Australia and Australians… No! (and auDa has not put a shred of information forward to justify their actions; they [and you] just attack people who have tried to stand up for accountability and transparency)
Your only justification for the stacking is (1) it was permitted by the constitution, or (2) it was done in accordance with fulfilling the government’s recommendation to increase membership.
Feable reasons. Board stacking should never have been permitted. Full stop. And the board and CEO doing so in such a blatant manner just proves the government’s “no longer fit” conclusion.
2. Name calling and attacking again because you are out of lipstick.
Already i know the defence, which is unacceptable, will be: “but Demand stacked the board/membership in the past” – if that were true, two wrongs don’t make a right. But the board appears to have compounded possible past mistakes instead of fixing them. Hence, now the board and CEO are evidently trying to loophole legitimacy for their imo unethical decision making processes and discredit Tim whose opinion is shared by the majority of members, beggars belief.
#NoAnonymousSledging – Time to clean up the Internet?
http://theluckygeneral.biz/2018/06/23/noanonymoussledging-time-to-clean-up-the-internet/
The majority of members, myself included, are afraid of auDA. auDA is a proven bully! Basically every Australian business owns a domain that auDA could delete (they tried and almost succeeded against Stewart; costing him over $100,000 to defend his business’ domain against idiocy), and most auDA members have reputations auDA could try to smear, as they have successfully done multiple times to people who speak up against them, such as Rowe and Szyndler. C’mon a confidential report is leaked from PPB to the Sydney Morning Herald… disgusting!
My point is: many people feel they need to remain anonymous if they wish to speak up against auDA, out of fear from an organisation with a proven history of petty, unwarranted retribution.
This is a very sad reality Mr Laurie and is based on auDA’s recent actions, and more eloquently mentioned by Tim and David Goldstein at the following link.
So yes, i choose to remain partially anonymous. Not by choice, out of fear, as i do not have a spare $100,000 to defend my company’s domain names from auDA’s wrath!
http://www.domainpulse.com/2018/08/07/audas-elected-demand-director-resigns/