Activists?

[Whois-Search]

I understand Tony Willoughby and Nick Wenban-Smith are giving a presentation today and tomorrow in South Africa regarding the DRS:

http://www.domaindisputes.co.za/event.php?eventID=2&title=Advanced ADR Workshop

However I am a little concerned by the schedule:

http://www.domaindisputes.co.za/downloads/events/2.pdf

Session 4: A: Current hot topics and trends, future direction of the DRS

1. Current consultation (NWS)
2. PAB feedback (NWS)
3. Further consultation in relation to Default Transfer (NWS)
4. Comment so far and activists reaction (NWS)
5. ERG review process and quality control (TW)
6. Annual review and guidance on divisive issues (TW)
7. Expert recruitment (NWS)

B: References:
http://www.nominet.org.uk/policy/consultations/previous/updatedrs/
http://www.nominet.org.uk/digitalAssets/21237_PAB_meeting_report_51.pdf
www.drsconsultation.co.uk


Therefore I have three questions:

1. Why is the term "activists reaction" being used? I presume this goes with the reference to drsconsultation.co.uk?

2. PAB meeting report 51 won't be approved until the next meeting on the 12th September?

3. Why is Nominet unable to attend the www.domainfocus.co.uk London event for one hour to discuss the above?

I was going to ask about "a further consultation in relation to default transfer" however I've just read nom-announce

 

[olebean]

 

[researcher]

I understand Tony Willoughby and Nick Wenban-Smith are giving a presentation today and tomorrow in South Africa regarding the DRS:

1. Why is the term "activists reaction" being used? I presume this goes with the reference to drsconsultation.co.uk?
...
3. Why is Nominet unable to attend the www.domainfocus.co.uk London event for one hour to discuss the above?

Does anyone really believe that Nominet are the slightest bit interested in the opinions of those who make up this forum? They’re a monopoly company which doesn’t have to care one iota what anyone on this forum thinks. They can do as they please within the remit of their AAs & Memorandum, and the way the company is structured as Section 30, you will never get a grip of their financial makeup. Tough to hear, I know, but they’re the facts.
In my experience, and I am generalising now when I say this, the only matters which make companies actually listen to external concerns, are those which might worry them, or adversely effect their business. For example:
- Losing customers or support
- Legal action
- Scandals & leaks
- Risks to profits and/or competition
- Embarrassing mistakes getting into the public domain
(generalisation over)

It’s great that members and customers, albeit a minority of knowledgeable ones, are prepared to ask direct questions of Nominet on forums or at trade events, but it only occasionally gets you anywhere. You have to ask yourself why Nominet won’t put any effort in to attend this Domain Focus event? Maybe they consider that there really is nothing in it for them? Don’t forget, they’re likely to come up against a collection of smart, domain savvy people who know how to ask awkward questions. Like any political animal, if it is invited to express its opinion, then confrontation is best avoided at all times. We already know that they don’t bother debating on this forum anymore. The best you will ever get are a handful of their employees probably paying regular visits here, just to see what the ‘enemy’ are saying about them.
Yes, it speaks volumes when they flew two senior bods out to SA this week, whilst at the same time it appears no one there will be bothered to travel less than 50 miles up the road to Domain Focus for the day. At this stage in their history, any debate or consultation can be done at arm’s length if they wish, which frankly is part of an evolutionary process which all companies go through to a greater or lesser degree. There may be benefits from this for the members or registrants, but the greatest benefit is to Nominet itself, allowing it to fine tune its position, and avoid as best it can, any possible problems for itself in the future. And there is absolutely nothing at all wrong with this, but one should realise that all established companies eventually prefer to consult in this way, and not at ‘trade’ events. It’s all part of a creeping entrenchment of position, as one would find in any established ‘service sector’ market place.
Over the next week, they’re going to move into their shiny new offices (Fort Minerva), and no doubt they’re be very pleased about how the business is doing great, onwards & upwards, etc. After all, as businesses go, it really appears to be a cushy number, it not that difficult a business to run, and they don’t actually make so much as a washer! If you really want Nominet to sit up and listen to you, you might consider rattling their cage a bit more often. Keep highlighting any mistakes if there are any, and don’t let them get away with a thing. They answer to us all, just make sure they’re reminded of that, which you appear to have a good grasp of!

 

[grandin]

Privatisation

Indeed, both labour and conservative governments have learnt to accept the fact that privatisation is a good thing....increased competition will always focus the mind

AND

A judicial review can be sort if a company has gained enormous power....indeed the judge in the itunes case did not state whether Nominet were subject to a judicial review but found the question to be unimportant at that point in time....today may well be very different

BUT

Who can be bothered to set forth on a thankless task

Lee