It stuned and surprised me that Robert Elz admited
to not know how to determine if consensus exists or how
to go about buidling consensus. It was decided that Ausbone
of which I am a director was to be managed by consensus.
in other words a member driven organisation, not a board
driven organisation.

it certainly appears that adna has failled because it
was first built and then went out looking for consensus.
what does consensus look it? can it be found under a rock?
what color is it? does it have a phone number?


I strongly propose that the board resign and that a new
orgnisation structure be developed within adna that accomodates
a consensus model from the ground up.

It is much easier to build an orgisation from a base
of consensus, rather then set off looking for it,
in essence admiting you dont already have it.

I also strongly suggest that all the "stakeholders" and
wannabe stakeholders are present on this list and hence
are already participating actively or passively. with
the exception of the chronic exagerator adam soap box todd.
I dont agree that adam should be excluded however adam
does not know how to shut up. perhaps we can restrict him
to 2 posts a day.

the first step is to open up the membership of adna to
all intersted parties. it is important imho to have an inclusive
membership and not an exclusive membership. any legal company,
orginsation or association or government body should be welcome
to join the new adna.  a mission statement or even a
constitution developed, of which the board becomes the keepers
and referee from.  something along the lines of ensuring the
integrity of the dns for the public, funding and protecting the
registry, code of conduct and licensing of registrars.


normal democratic process can install a new structure
and determine courses of action. where interested parties
like the public are not well represented I suggest that in
cases of conflicting proposals that the end public itself
be given the choice and standard market forces used to determine
the best approach.

the new organisation needs to be funded, and I propose a small
percentage based levi be introduced on licensed registrars 
immediately to fund the bodies activities. the exact details
can be determined by the members.

the new structure must have the blatent conflicts of
interests removed. clear separation of powers, and clear
mechanisms for proposal submission for changes and democratic
or consensual member participation. 

what I really weant to avoid seeing is meandering down the
road ahead exmaning every blade of grass and rock as though
there is no urgency. imho there is an urgency to get the
show on the road and to sketch out the broader picture
with the involvement of all interested parties. I am appalled
at the lack of progress of the last 12 months and its clear
from the number of people on this list that there is a consensus
for a fresh start. that there is a consensus for a body to
be a forum for dns in this country and that all interested parties need
to be involved from the start and to build on that consensual base.
I dont believe we need wait for NOIE or anyone else for us to
build a workable structure we can all agree will be working
towards the best interests of the public.

does anyone disagree?

Vic