A Personal Commitment!

[sneezycheese]

Hi All,

I am willing to commit £50,000 towards legal costs etc. to try and 'correct' most of the 'problem issues' @ Nominet. This commitment is based on that others will offer a similar commitment to a total level of around £1,000,000 that I think we'll need to put most of the main 'problem' issues @ Nominet to bed! ...Not literally of course

Best Regards,

Simon.

 

[Stephen]

Nominet change

What is it exactly you want to change please?

What is your preferred solution to the .uk issue?

Will you commit your time to the process of changing things at Nominet?

 

[Lucien Taylor]

Well that's great sneezycheese.

There are live allegations of breaches of directors' duties. http://www.avoid.co.uk/lesley-cowle...ers-opinion-breaches-of-directors-duties.html

which were not answered in a subsequent QC's opinion purporting to address the allegations http://www.avoid.co.uk/lesley-cowley-files/1907-nominets-comedy-qc-report.html

The QC's opinion reopens legal arguments that Nominet lost in tribunal (QC Michael Todd is not an employment lawyer), attacks Emily's character, and completely fails to address key documents refered to in the Barden opinion (particularly the statement to members 16 Aug 2012 which contains several misleading statements and a key part of the Barden report). It highlights the 'manufactured' misreading (the most important aspect of the Chair's AGM address to members) as fact.

These are serious allegations, former Directors have lost their jobs on far flimsier evidence. As even the Nominet board seemed to agree at the AGM there is clearly an issue of 'trust' between 'this side of the room, and that side of the room'. I believe that it would go some way towards trust-building and bridge-building if these allegations were fairly tested.


Stephen, do we forgive them these allegations because we cannot afford it? Or have you perhaps made up your mind about those allegations before they have been properly tested?

As Minister Ed Vaisey said in recent correspondence to me, Nominet is a private company limited by guarantee. We the members, are its regulators. We have responsibility for handling allegations against the board.

Are there 12 members from different sectors of the membership willing to hear those allegations and consider the evidence? I recluse myself for obvious reasons.

 

[Stephen]

Why?

...Stephen, do we forgive them these allegations because we cannot afford it? Or have you perhaps made up your mind about those allegations before they have been properly tested?

No I do not and hopefully the full story will be told and justice be provided.

My questions with so much going on at Nominet about .uk, biased help to promote favoured Director, past employment tribunal issues, action against Avoid.co.uk, previous directors resignation statements and the list goes on ....

Not to forget the issue of .uk and what are the real motivations at Nominet to ram this through, why are they not being helpful in building a fuller picture of the options and providing a real debate?

I was simply asking what is the cause of this action of providing funds and what outcome is sought.

 

[Paullas]

Not to forget the issue of .uk and what are the real motivations at Nominet to ram this through, why are they not being helpful in building a fuller picture of the options and providing a real debate?.

Because there is money in the gold mines and they need to get it sooner rather than later as i have a feeling once .uk goes through and all the bonuses paid we will see alot of people leaving nominet and leaving the problems for the new comers.

 

[Lucien Taylor]

Ah, yes, and my point (which one could read as negative, sorry) - was a rhetorical question. I guessed you think that.

I put in my bid -

1. Re-establish trust (deal with live allegations fairly)
2. Address awful undemocratic elections and disproportionate influence of top 13, next
3. Review corporate governance and membership to include broader base of stakeholders, less vested interests using painstaking bottom-up process.
4. Consult on .uk initiatives properly, painfully, transparently, bottom-up. Stop behaving like a bank in a cut-throat world.

We shouldn't need sneezycheese money - Nominet should be breaking down the door to support such a plan.

 

[sneezycheese]

1) What is it exactly you want to change please?

2) What is your preferred solution to the .uk issue?

3) Will you commit your time to the process of changing things at Nominet?

Hi Stephen,

In answer to your questions;

1) The Executive IN IT'S ENTIRETY, including those in senior management positions e.g. those ex. senior Civil Servants that between them and the executives have contributed to what is in my opinion at the very least a deception of the membership and it's 'customers' (i.e.registrants), and at the other end a damn outright and blatant fraud!

2) A full consultation with all *.uk registrants as a start would be good! The 'spam' argument is getting quite tiresome, (i.e. I'm sure when it comes to selling direct .uk domains Nominet wil be more than happy to 'offer the opportunity' to existing *.uk registrants).

3) I'm commited to provide as much time as I can. You may of noticed I've not been very active on this forum as of late, this is due to the fact that my wife is terminaly ill with Cancer and has nearly died a number of times, and to top it off my sister died last Friday afternoon having lost her battle with Cystic Fibrosis at the age of 32!

Best regards,

Simon.

 

[GreyWing]

Hi Simon,

Very sorry to hear about your other issues. Don't worry to much about these people at the minute, they ain't worth it and we are well on top in this battle. As you know (may know) there are some things going off that isn't in the Public Domain, the walls are closing in on them.

Please mate, don't divert one precious minute of your time from your wife onto people who are frankly not worth it. I guarantee that I and others will follow them all the way until they are out of the doors at Nominet.

All the best and take care
GW

 

[Stephen]

Simon

Very sorry to hear your bad personal news and wish you and your family all the hope to get through these difficult times.

Stephen

 

[Stephen]

.uk legal or marketing spend?

1) The Executive IN IT'S ENTIRETY, including those in senior management positions e.g. those ex. senior Civil Servants that between them and the executives have contributed to what is in my opinion at the very least a deception of the membership and it's 'customers' (i.e.registrants), and at the other end a damn outright and blatant fraud!

With .uk it certainly looks like from my perspective that Nominet are not even going to the effort they made on V1 to get views and are just trying to get it through without debating fully the other options, whether .uk is needed at all or if they have the right mechanism changes that would make it fairer and do less damage to the UK namespace.

Nominet are not engaging in a debate and are looking like breaking their promise to be more transparent about .uk.

2) A full consultation with all *.uk registrants as a start would be good! The 'spam' argument is getting quite tiresome, (i.e. I'm sure when it comes to selling direct .uk domains Nominet wil be more than happy to 'offer the opportunity' to existing *.uk registrants).

I would certainly like to see a wider debate and involvement of many more current stakeholders.

If Nominet did contact the UK registrants (which at this stage, I feel highly unlikely) they would need to provide information that would better explain the situation and provide the pros and cons of the different alternative options.

As it has been forcibly posted here that the majority of registrants would not understand the implications, so in the best practice of consultations another document would need to be drawn up.

One option may be to prepare such a document and weave in comments from Edwin' articles (if he would be okay with it) and present to the media and public / businesses / UK registrants.

Any money raised could be used to publicize the document (if Nominet would not fund its distribution) as if the wider audience participated rather than a few registrars, I'm sure we would end up with something much better for the UK namespace.

 

[mojoco]

Would it be worth placing our own advert / article in the major press to highlight the direct.uk issue to the wiider public ?

 

[Nigel]

Firstly Simon - very sorry to hear of your wife's battle with cancer, and the loss of your sister. I pray that you and all your family are given strength to cope at this difficult time.

I agree with Greywing - best to give your wife all the time you can. The opposition against nominet is growing and we'll all redouble our efforts to get changes at nominet.

 

[Whois-Search]

Would it be worth placing our own advert / article in the major press to highlight the direct.uk issue to the wiider public ?

Very good idea - full page in the Daily Mail ?

 

[Stephen]

Document first

Very good idea - full page in the Daily Mail ?

Agree. Other papers will feed of the advert and start to run as a story.

Need the document first, that they can see online which show the "full picture" of .uk and Nominet's action or lack of them to bring this matter to the attention of all those that will be effected by it.

If this was done I'm sure there would be more comments like this generated, Foz posted on another thread :

Response from Association of New Zealand Advertisers Inc to .nz resonates.

http://dnc.org.nz/content/registrations_second_level_2_anza.pdf

 

[Stephen]

contribute?

Very good idea - full page in the Daily Mail ?

Subject to agreeing content of a report, which show the full .uk picture aimed at bringing the matters of the .uk to a wider audience.

If anybody would like to contribute the promise of monies to a transparent marketing fund for PR agency and media adverts.

Also if anybody would commit some time to SEO, website design, press releases that would be useful.

Please post here or PM me, if you would like to contribute.

 

[Edwin]

If anyone is seriously thinking of going down the advertising route, please keep my name off the copy - thanks. If you need to, you can take certain excerpts and rewrite them in your own words - but then they become YOUR words and YOU own them.

I have strong feelings about .uk, as anyone present at any of the Roundtables I went to can instantly attest, but I don't want my name turning up in an ad in the mainstream press (even in the form of a quote from a report I've written)!

 

[Alien]

I don't want my name turning up in an ad in the mainstream press (even in the form of a quote from a report I've written)!

Thing is though Edwin - you've previously written a report/piece (whatever you want to call it) and released it to the 'public domain'?

If someone chooses to cite you or quote you directly (even using their own words) etc and it's properly referenced/credited to you, it's like any other research, academic material which is used, etc, etc? The media could do this already (maybe they already have?).

e.g. Edwin (2013) discusses that......etc.

 

[Stephen]

If anyone is seriously thinking of going down the advertising route, please keep my name off the copy - thanks. If you need to, you can take certain excerpts and rewrite them in your own words - but then they become YOUR words and YOU own them.

I have strong feelings about .uk, as anyone present at any of the Roundtables I went to can instantly attest, but I don't want my name turning up in an ad in the mainstream press (even in the form of a quote from a report I've written)!

Point taken, will do.

 

[Edwin]

Not the case if it's an ad rather than editorial, which is what was being discussed here.

 

[sneezycheese]

Get Of Your High Horse And Put Your Money W.Y.M.I.

Not the case if it's an ad rather than editorial, which is what was being discussed here.

That is not was is being discussed here, so stop trying to hijack a worthwhile thread/cause!

Maybe I should call you 'ed-no-balls', cause you ain't put-up diddly squat to help anyone else but yours-truly!

So get off your high horse and do summit usefull, rather than, mouth, mouth, mouth!

3:15 hours before wifes next life saving operation, sister now in funeral home rather than mortury.

Love to all...

Simon.