I remember a ruling where no companies registered after a certain date would be allowed to participate in such projects. This prevented people registering companies just to apply for certain domain names. 

By disallowing any companies registered after June 1, 2005 would have prevented any kind of activity. 

I don't know why this rule was not included for the allocation for geographic domain names and it would have created a fairer playing field. 

It's too late to whinge about this now. I hope he uses the domain names wisely. 

Cheers, 
Nigel 
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: bw 
  To: '.au DNS Discussion List' 
  Sent: Wednesday, August 31, 2005 11:32 AM
  Subject: Re: [DNS] Australia's luckiest man?


  So far he is the only one that's been found to do this, how many others did? 

   

  Whoever drew up the rules either didn't foresee this happening or it is allowed. 

   

  Still waiting on the auDA to say something. or are they still partying?

   

  bw

   

   

   


------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  From: dns-bounces+bw=efe.com.au§dotau.org [mailto:dns-bounces+bw=efe.com.au§dotau.org] On Behalf Of Ryan
  Sent: Wednesday, 31 August 2005 11:19 AM
  To: '.au DNS Discussion List'
  Subject: Re: [DNS] Australia's luckiest man?

   

  I had many clients wanting these name and spending $2000 is pocket change compared to what the names are worth, Bottom line is the system FAILED and should be reviewed ASAP..

   


------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  From: dns-bounces+ryant=arach.net.au§dotau.org [mailto:dns-bounces+ryant=arach.net.au§dotau.org] On Behalf Of Dave
  Sent: Wednesday, August 31, 2005 8:35 AM
  To: .au DNS Discussion List
  Subject: Re: [DNS] Australia's luckiest man?

   

    He's paid out $1000 to register the company and he's paid out about a $1000
    for the release fee that's $2000. How many would have paid that figure to 
    abide by the rules! Not many I would think. Do the maths on that one!


  I'm sorry but I don't understand your point.  Are you saying that we shouldn't expect someone that spends that sort of money to abide by the rules?




------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  Message transport security by GatewayDefender
  9:34:03 PM ET - 8/30/2005


------------------------------------------------------------------------------


  ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
  List policy, unsubscribing and archives => http://dotau.org/


  __________________________________________________________
  Message transport security by GatewayDefender.com
  9:34:03 PM ET - 8/30/2005

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.cynosure.com.au/mailman/private/dns/attachments/20050831/8a17fc3d/attachment.htm