|> -----Original Message-----
|> From: Peter [mailto:peter§instra.com.au] 
|> Sent: Saturday, March 23, 2002 2:25 PM
|> To: dns§lists.auda.org.au
|> Subject: RE: [DNS] DNS List
|> 
|>> "First, I wasn't offering legal advise. I was making comments on the
|>> legal advise given and showing the shortcomings in it. "
|> 
|> What were you offering?

Who said I had to offer anything other than an opinion?

|> "A question for you Peter, do you consider it practical for Directors
to
|> avoid all risk of litigation?"
|> 
|> The directors should at all times act in the best interest of the
company 
|> (within the law) As a director of auDA (but not speaking on behalf of
auDA) I 
|> believe you are talking nonsense - and I believe you are doing it
mischievously.

As I have a different opinion to you and have had differing legal advise
on the topic you consider I am being mischievious.  Give me a break.
Your comments are not very professional or polite.  A poor reflection on
both yourself and AuDA.

|> Now - I agree this forum should have freedom of discussion - but to
say we 
|> should not take notice of legal advice (nothing else could be
interpreted 
|> from the initial posting in this series) and then to say you weren't 
|> offering legal advice   leaves your credibility in doubt.

You need to check your definitions.  An opinion expressed does not
indicate legal advice even if the topic is on legal matters.  My
credibility is not in question or relevent to the discussion but since
you raise the matter, I have been running a number of mailing lists for
far longer than AuDA.  This gives me some experience in the area and
qualifies me to discuss the topic.  An unspecified unattributed legal
opinion has far less credibility than I have.

|> Yes - I am a director of auDA, and I will take positions that promote
auDA 
|> (and its members) but I will not ignore the norms of business
practice and 
|> listen to "locker-room-barristers" of whom you are (by your 
|> own admission) one.

I have not made any admission as such, nor have I offered legal advice.
If you wish to view my expression of opinions and discussion of the
topic as such, that reflects on you and not me.

|> Now please answer the simple question - or close the debate by not
replying.

I have answered the question.  You are being obtuse and purposely
offensive in your display of understanding.

|> Those of us who are serious about listening to our constituency do
not want 
|> to be distracted by trouble-makers. You decide who you think you are
and 
|> the audience can judge.

So now you consider me a trouble maker, on what do you base that
assumption?  The fact I do not consider a mailing list administrator
responsible for the posts to a mailing list under their control?  If you
deal in the same manner with other who disagree with you the AuDA board
meetings must be a real hoot.

|> >And a general question to all, do you consider the threat of
litigation
|> >sufficient incentive to abandon logical actions?
|> 
|> I'm sorry but I can't actually find any logic in this question it
implies 
|> that the threat of litigation is an end in tiself ...If Dassa will
expand 
|> it into an understandable question - I will attempt to give my
opinion


Just for you I will rephrase the question.  Is it considered appropriate
for the threat of litigation to dictate what we do where there is no
logical reason for the litigation to be successful?

Darryl (Dassa) Lynch.