Looking for your vote, UK domainers. AMA

[Kieren]

There's a Nominet Board election open right now (voting closes end of the month) and I'm standing and so asking for your vote.

I'm Kieren McCarthy - you most likely know me from the articles I've written for The Register - and I want you to a) bother to vote and b) vote for me.

Happy to answer any questions AMA-style.

 

[aZooZa]

8 posts since 2006 - can that be correct?

 

[Ben Thomas]

8 posts since 2006 - can that be correct?

At least he's surfaced. There's always one that comes and posts here, every single year. And that's always the candidate that I vote for. The other 2 candidates (whoever they are that year) never seem to bother. So why should we.

 

[Kieren]

8 posts since 2006 - can that be correct?

Yes, that's right. I'm not a domainer and so rarely have much to say. But I often check-in on Acorn to see what's happening.

 

[super-whois]

On your candidacy, you say you work at IFFOR, now lets delve into that.

https://projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/organizations/451015160

https://itp.cdn.icann.org/en/files/...nsoring-organization-agreement-26jul10-en.pdf

https://iffor.org/board-minutes/

Are you proposing the same transparency at Nominet as you do at IFFOR?

Comprehensive Board minutes - but none published since January 2018, and the previous ones weren't comprehensive.
Publish staff reports - none published
Publish Board Commitee [sic] minutes - none published
Defined policy process - defined, but not put into practice
Price review - .xxx has gone up in price, but IFFOR only gets $100,000
Acquistions [sic] review - last I checked, you were against an inquiry into CyGlass - but wasn't ICM Registry bought by GoDaddy? I don't see GoDaddy declared?
Formal member input - there doesn't seem to be any form of stakeholder input at IFFOR
Documents in plain English - when was the last document published by IFFOR?
Member engagement - you're paid to engage at IFFOR, but I can't see that you've done that?

https://circleid.com/posts/7171/9254/
https://www.thedomains.com/2013/01/...ded-by-xxx-finally-gives-2-grants-of-5k-each/

Looks like nothing has changed?

 

[Kieren]

IFFOR has a budget of $100,000 a year. It is a small non-profit that has been focused in recent years on producing educational materials for 11-14 year-olds over online sexual content (AtFirstSite is a great course btw).

Nominet is a £50 million business that oversees the .uk registry with 2,500 members and over 10 million stakeholders (.uk domain name holders).

You might as well argue that Dulwich Hamlet should be signing Ronaldo if it wants to get up the table.

 

[super-whois]

IFFOR has a budget of $100,000 a year.

So what do you do for $60,000 per year. Nothing? The same Nothing we will see you doing on the board.

 

[Kieren]

So what do you do for $60,000 per year. Nothing? The same Nothing we will see you doing on the board.

Thanks for the question. Here's what I would do if elected to the Board: https://www.kierenmccarthy.co.uk/2022/08/11/what-i-will-do-in-real-terms-if-elected/

------

I’m standing for the Nominet board. In my election statement, I gave two goals:

1. Rebuild trust
2. Improve communication

But what does that mean in reality?

Here’s what I will do in the job:

• Put in the work
• Be responsive
• Ensure members are heard
• Push accountability
• Improve member engagement
• Push transparency

Put in the work

• Read everything that comes across my desk
• Follow up if there is anything I don’t understand or feel needs greater explanation
• Work to gain a full understanding of each part of Nominet’s business

Be responsive

• Make myself available to any member who wants to discuss Nominet’s work or actions
• Seek out answers (from members and/or Nominet) if there is something I don’t know or understand
• Explain why I can’t discuss something if there is a confidentiality issue, and how it applies in that case

Support members
When it comes to Board discussions and decisions, I will:

• Ask how member input will be received
• Ask what level of member input will be required to move forward
• Check on member input throughout the process
• Ensure member input is accurately reflected and properly addressed by the Board
• Ask for member input to be reflected in official minutes

Push accountability
Once Board decisions are made, I will:

• Push for clear explanations for why the decision was made
• Push for any disagreement or proposed alternatives to be reflected in the minutes
• Ask members if they are content with the explanation
• Go back to the Board if members are dissatisfied and seek a better or clearer explanation
• Push for staff reports or other relevant materials to be published alongside decisions

Improve member engagement
When it comes to members, I will:

• Push Nominet to measure levels of member engagement
• Push for member engagement to be a core component of the senior staff’s performance assessments
• Identify different types of members and help devise different ways of reaching them
• Find out why some members may not be engaging and push changes that will make that more likely
• Actively consider how different members will be affected differently by decisions

Push transparency
When it comes to communication, I will:

• Argue for openness as a default within every process
• Insist on plain English in all member communications
• Push back on anything that is unclear or gives a misleading impression
• Ask how members are expected to see the communication
• Ask for an assessment of how effective the communication has been

 

[super-whois]

Comprehensive Board minutes - but none published since January 2018, and the previous ones weren't comprehensive.
Publish staff reports - none published
Publish Board Commitee [sic] minutes - none published
Defined policy process - defined, but not put into practice
Price review - .xxx has gone up in price, but IFFOR only gets $100,000
Acquistions [sic] review - last I checked, you were against an inquiry into CyGlass - but wasn't ICM Registry bought by GoDaddy? I don't see GoDaddy declared?
Formal member input - there doesn't seem to be any form of stakeholder input at IFFOR
Documents in plain English - when was the last document published by IFFOR?
Member engagement - you're paid to engage at IFFOR, but I can't see that you've done that?

Please answer these points and questions.

If you don't do your work at IFFOR, how can we trust that you do anything at Nominet?

 

[Kieren]

Please answer these points and questions.

If you don't do your work at IFFOR, how can we trust that you do anything at Nominet?

I have two answers for you:

https://mindpersuasion.com/when-did-you-stop-beating-your-wife/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sealioning


Kieren

 

[Ben Thomas]

Please answer these points and questions.

If you don't do your work at IFFOR, how can we trust that you do anything at Nominet?

It’s a fair point, @Kieren.

Why are there so many discrepancies between what had been said and what has been done at IFFOR?

 

[Ben Thomas]

PS. Sealioning that’s a funny word. Not heard of that before, thanks for the link.

 

[super-whois]

I have two answers for you:

I think you mean:

• Charlatan
  
• Shyster

Lets not look at .nxt:
https://domainincite.com/28166-its-hustings-season-at-nominet#comments

 

[michaeltoth]

Good day Kieren

Over the years I have supported you and your writing and have found you both informed, eloquent and interesting. For all intents and purposes an honest and fair individual. Above the level of inane ranting for one’s own betterment.


With this in mind I would like to ask two questions please.


1, Can you please fully disclose your full involvement with .xxx and how much they pay .xxx and how much of that is paid to you. .xxx is part of the Porn Industry infrastructure and I think it has a relevance to you standing for the board. I also believe the money was to fund good society projects, which projects has it funded and how much was spent. Please reply considering that I already know the full answer but would like to hear it from your lips. Full disclosure and all.

2, I recently received a letter from Nominet about the board elections. It was in Nominet colours, their logo and beautifully styled. Even the way it was written looked like a Nominet letter. Once opened and quickly scanned I still saw this as Nominet. It wasn't until after I read about the reasons not to vote for Jim Davies and Volker Greimann did I think again scan back up to realised my utter mistake.

My question is have you sought approval from Nominet to do this? If so, which I highly doubt, then what you have done is break every IP rule in the book. Not exactly an open way of presenting your argument. If you did get approval then I can only surmise you are on Nominet's side.

Either way openness is what you are shouting for and this goes against all what you have said.

With this in mind I am voting for Jim Davies, a professional lawyer who has had the backs of all domainers for over the last ten years. Being a lawyer and has an encyclopedic knowledge about IP and is completely open and honest. He is also campaigning to cut domain prices back to £2.50 a year. (just edited this paragraph to make sense)


I still like you Kieren I just don't believe you are the man for this job at this particular time.


Regards Michael Toth

 

[Ben Thomas]

He is also campaigning to cut domain prices back to £2.50 a year.

Oh, go on then. You've twisted my arm.

 

[LCHappy]

@Kieren In the years of watching Nominet. I have never seen a more unpleasant campaign of someone attacking other candidates. The mailshot you sent was really vicious and uncalled for. It doesn't paint you as a nice person.

 

[Ben Thomas]

Anybody get Tory vibes?

 

[super-whois]

Anybody get Tory vibes?

True, they were all attacking each other in the leadership contest, but they did have an opportunity to change their vote.

From what I can see, only one Nominet NED candidate is attacking the others, so I hope he doesn't get elected.

 

[Kieren]

It’s a fair point, @Kieren.

Why are there so many discrepancies between what had been said and what has been done at IFFOR?

The short answer is: there aren't.

I do think the point about Board meeting minutes is absolutely fair, and I'm working on digging out the old minutes to post them: you will be amazed at how uninteresting they are. Approval of the grants recipients; agreement to update the course. It's a very small non-profit.

The rest is just insinuation that exists solely because Nominet's past behaviour has lead to so much distrust and aggression that attack mode has become a default for some.

A big part of why I'm standing is I realised this last time around - where the chair and CEO were fired - that Nominet's culture risks becoming a culture of conflict. I saw the exact same thing at ICANN; embedded positions of mistrust.

And so I figured I would stand for the Board and make the case for getting Nominet back to an organisation that does what it should do, and no more, and whose members rely on it and trust it.

I do have a plan for doing that and if enough members vote for me, I will do all I can to make it happen.


Kieren

 

[Kieren]

Good day Kieren

There's nothing wrong with have a preference for a particular candidate. If you think Jim Davies most clearly represents your interests then vote for him.

But don't be surprised when the same tactics as the last time he was on the board don't work again a second time (https://www.theregister.com/2009/01/26/davies_nominet_resignation/).


What I stand for is clear: https://www.kierenmccarthy.co.uk/nominet/

Who I am is clear: https://www.theregister.com/2021/04/01/nominet_future_plans/


If domainers want a Nominet that just does its job, that listens to and respects their views, and which makes decisions that they can follow and influence, then I think the choice is clear.


Kieren