Steven,

I was not calling you a spineless bastard.

I'm calling the industry representatives that feel strongly about this
issue that are not willing to take a stance or speak up about it
spineless bastards.

You are as much a victim of the lapse as the previous registrant.

You are obeying the current rules, I have no problem with this, I have
an issue with the content of the rules themselves.

Your stance is 'for' the existing rules allowing advertising as you have
participated in it, but;


My question, now, however becomes this, not of you, but of the system.


As you are now the registrant of this domain, under what criteria do you
propose to transfer it back to the previous registrant?


I understand your good intentions to resolve this, but apart from
canceling the domain name outright, what part of 
http://www.auda.org.au/policies/auda-2004-03/
can you satisfy? Please feel free not to answer this, as I have not
intended to cause you any personal grief, but this illustrates another
point.

Perhaps this argument is better aligned at the existing policy review of
Domain Expiry, Renewal and Deletion.

http://www.auda.org.au/reviews/expiry-2006/

I shall direct some of my enthusiasm there.

Cheers,
-Sean.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: steven§hitpro.com [mailto:steven§hitpro.com]
> Sent: Monday, September 04, 2006 12:04 PM
> To: .au DNS Discussion List
> Cc: Sean K. Finn; dvdnovak§hotmail.com
> Subject: dineonline.com.au issue resolved
> 
> Sean,
> 
> I do not appreciate being called a spineless bastard, especially as
> you have got it wrong.
> 
> All it took was a courteous call from the previous registrant who
> explained what had happened, that the domain inadvertently dropped and
> that the company had started developing it.
> 
> I agreed to authorise its transfer back.
> 
> Steven