Nominet AGM Recording

[JimDavies]

The recording of the AGM has been published on the hub, behind the membership "paywall". It also has a heavy handed disclaimer attached, basically preventing any publication outside of the members hub.

 

[DJ]

I didn't vote as there wasn't a third option for don't care, as it is the same old drivel anyway.

 

[JimDavies]

I didn't vote as there wasn't a third option for don't care, as it is the same old drivel anyway.

I agree, the format was very weighted in favour of the management in terms of controlling the narrative. But I think there were some important things said that should be given a wider audience.

 

[super-whois]

I didn't vote as there wasn't a third option for don't care, as it is the same old drivel anyway.

Isn't that a reason to vote NO to all the resolutions?

 

[Ben Thomas]

What purpose would making it public serve, @JimDavies? Genuine question.

 

[JimDavies]

Isn't that a reason to vote NO to all the resolutions?

I think they mean the poll, not the AGM resolutions.

 

[JimDavies]

What purpose would making it public serve, @JimDavies? Genuine question.

Firstly, so non-members who are interested stakeholders can see it. Journalists for example.

Also as part of a more general drive towards transparency. It's a question of culture when dealing with part of the national critical infrastructure. All candidates in the recent election called for it, as did the Public Benefit campaign.

Or to turn it around, what benefit is there in reducing transparency and accountability? I don't think recent AGMs had that level of restriction on them and both 2020 and 2021 are on YouTube. So are we going backwards?

 

[Ben Thomas]

Firstly, so non-members who are interested stakeholders can see it. Journalists for example.

Also as part of a more general drive towards transparency. It's a question of culture when dealing with part of the national critical infrastructure. All candidates in the recent election called for it, as did the Public Benefit campaign.

Or to turn it around, what benefit is there in reducing transparency and accountability? I don't think recent AGMs had that level of restriction on them and both 2020 and 2021 are on YouTube. So are we going backwards?

Totally agree, Jim. Just wanted to hear your perspective on it. It's pretty odd that they have took that step backwards.

 

[DJ]

Isn't that a reason to vote NO to all the resolutions?

I meant I didn't vote in this pole.

 

[xdnet]

I don't think recent AGMs had that level of restriction on them and both 2020 and 2021 are on YouTube. So are we going backwards?

I'm pretty sure the versions on YouTube are not official, and are the reason there is now a strong notice on videos about not publishing them.

I meant I didn't vote in this pole.

All the more reason to vote no on resolutions IMO. Shows in the stats that you've voted, just not for the candidates. Closest you can get to spoiling your ballot with Nominet. (I'd very much like to see a None of the above option added to all elections for this reason)

 

[DJ]

I'm pretty sure the versions on YouTube are not official, and are the reason there is now a strong notice on videos about not publishing them.



All the more reason to vote no on resolutions IMO. Shows in the stats that you've voted, just not for the candidates. Closest you can get to spoiling your ballot with Nominet. (I'd very much like to see a None of the above option added to all elections for this reason)

To confirm once more, I voted, but I did not vote in this pole about releasing the video.

 

[xdnet]

To confirm once more, I voted, but I did not vote in this pole about releasing the video.

Note to self, don't post before coffee...

 

[Ben Thomas]

Note to self, don't post before coffee...

I think you will find it is English tea that we drink this side of the pond, fella.

 

[JimDavies]

I'm pretty sure the versions on YouTube are not official, and are the reason there is now a strong notice on videos about not publishing them.

Which was my point. The previous ones are now essentially "free to air", which means for example that we can see Mark Wood telling the meeting in 2020 that he had received legal advice on weighted voting. I agree it would be better if Nominet just published it on their website, but that was at least something.

Nominet trying to prevent any distribution is a big step backwards and a sign of the old school "them and us" mentality reasserting itself. Other stakeholders are being prevented from seeing it. Everyone is being prevented from referencing it. Kieren has promised on Twitter to fix it and Simon has liked Kieren's Tweet, so let's see what happens in the next few days.

 

[xdnet]

I think you will find it is English tea that we drink this side of the pond, fella.

True. Start with a pint of strong Tea, then coffee to get through for me!

 

[JimDavies]

I think you will find it is English tea that we drink this side of the pond, fella.

But your signature says "Buy me a coffee...."

 

[Ben Thomas]

But your signature says "Buy me a coffee...."

Touché, Jim. Touché. I shall remedy this immediately!

 

[Ben Thomas]

True. Start with a pint of strong Tea, then coffee to get through for me!

A pint, you say?

And then a coffee, you say?

 

[xdnet]

The real irony is caffeine makes me sleepy unless I consume a stupid amount. So it's sleepy or jittery.

Sorry Jim, did not mean to highjack this thread with talk of hot beverages...

 

[Ben Thomas]

The real irony is caffeine makes me sleepy unless I consume a stupid amount. So it's sleepy or jittery.

Do you have ADHD, by chance?