At the auDA AGM on Monday, Item 8 on the agenda was a special resolution proposed by former auDA Director Simon Johnson. For completeness, I should add that this was supposedly proposed in his private capacity as a Demand Class member.
Special Resolution — Amendment of Constitution:
Fit and Proper Persons Test, proposed by demand class member Simon Johnson
This was overwhelmingly voted down.
In fact, when the Chair asked both Demand and Supply Class members in the room (separately) who was in favour, not one person raised their “green card”. When asked who was against, there was a sea of green.
These Are The Questions That Remain Unanswered
As per my article dated 23rd November:
a. Given that the proposer was also an auDA Director at the time, was this resolution first discussed with any other auDA Directors (or the CEO) before being added to the Agenda?
b. Was it first vetted by auDA lawyers to ensure it was capable of being enacted? i.e. Not in conflict with other parts of the Constitution; or the Corporations Act?
c. Given auDA’s commitment to the Government that it will be responsive to the wider internet community, could the adoption of this resolution preclude or disenfranchise certain people?
d. What process has been adopted for members to put up resolutions for consideration at the AGM? Have members been informed that this process is available to all? If not, why not?
auDA members are really tired of being ignored, and want a return to transparency and communication.
That was part of the platform that Nicole and I ran on – and the emphatic vote we received should be a wake-up call to auDA.
Ned O’Meara – 29th November 2017