- Joined
- Dec 25, 2004
- Posts
- 1,960
- Reaction score
- 375
Membership is FREE – with unlimited access to all features, tools, and discussions. Premium accounts get benefits like banner ads and newsletter exposure. ✅ Signature links are now free for all. 🚫 No AI-generated (LLM) posts allowed. Share your own thoughts and experience — accounts may be terminated for violations.
Recorded interviews with board candidates
- Thread starter Whois-Search
- Start date
- Status
Is the fact that Lord Erroll is a lord who has inherited his title something that Nominet members here will consider a negative when they come to cast their votes? Many of his relevant experiences (on parlimentary committies) appear to have been gained through his position in the Lords. He's an anachronism. When I first read throught the candidates list I saw "Lord Erroll" and thought someone was standing using an online handle (or had changed their name to match 
).
That said - he is making a good contribution to the Lords - against ID cards and ensuring the computer misuse act didn't criminalise as many of us as it might have.
Andrew Bennett - I think the board is too small for a member to be representing a small group - 'domainers' with a particular self-interest. The interests of domainers are the same as those of the UK as a whole; if the UK internet economy and .uk in particular suceed then so do domainers.
Angus Hanton - another "single issue" candidate; and his single issue has pretty much been solved by the recent reduction in nominet fees.
Peter Gradwell - he's looking at the big picture - he's looking forward and he's considering strategy. I think he's thinking along the right lines though I'm put off by the fact that I don't know what he means by: "I will also
encourage Nominet to participate in the wider electronic communications industry and deploy its management, technical and regulatory skills to develop the common databases needed to advance that industry. ". In relation to the Nominet scope consultation for example - which option is he in favour of. I also can't see why he's a good person to represent the large commercial entities - a role he suggests he would take on.
As I'm not a nominet member I don't have a say in this election, and that's a problem none of the candidates are addressing.
).That said - he is making a good contribution to the Lords - against ID cards and ensuring the computer misuse act didn't criminalise as many of us as it might have.
Andrew Bennett - I think the board is too small for a member to be representing a small group - 'domainers' with a particular self-interest. The interests of domainers are the same as those of the UK as a whole; if the UK internet economy and .uk in particular suceed then so do domainers.
Angus Hanton - another "single issue" candidate; and his single issue has pretty much been solved by the recent reduction in nominet fees.
Peter Gradwell - he's looking at the big picture - he's looking forward and he's considering strategy. I think he's thinking along the right lines though I'm put off by the fact that I don't know what he means by: "I will also
encourage Nominet to participate in the wider electronic communications industry and deploy its management, technical and regulatory skills to develop the common databases needed to advance that industry. ". In relation to the Nominet scope consultation for example - which option is he in favour of. I also can't see why he's a good person to represent the large commercial entities - a role he suggests he would take on.
As I'm not a nominet member I don't have a say in this election, and that's a problem none of the candidates are addressing.
Last edited:
Kieren
Nominet Member
- Joined
- Sep 25, 2006
- Posts
- 63
- Reaction score
- 15
You've not listened to the interviews, you muppet
I'm the person who did these interviews that the thread refers to and I'm amazed that you've replied to this post without actually listening to them.
Especially since many of the questions you raise are asked in the interviews and were the whole reason I decided to do them in the first place.
* Lord Erroll says in his interview that he was a hereditary peer but then was one of the 90 chosen to continue on.
* I specifically say to Angus Hanton that he is a one issue candidate and he refutes that and then says what else he believes Nominet should do
And so on and so forth...
Kieren
I'm the person who did these interviews that the thread refers to and I'm amazed that you've replied to this post without actually listening to them.
Especially since many of the questions you raise are asked in the interviews and were the whole reason I decided to do them in the first place.
* Lord Erroll says in his interview that he was a hereditary peer but then was one of the 90 chosen to continue on.
* I specifically say to Angus Hanton that he is a one issue candidate and he refutes that and then says what else he believes Nominet should do
And so on and so forth...
Kieren
such things are very common on this board i'm afraid. however i must point out that we are not all as stupid on here
welcome btw - and good job with the recordings!
Kieren
Nominet Member
- Joined
- Sep 25, 2006
- Posts
- 63
- Reaction score
- 15
Really? Muppet to me is friendly, jokey abuse. Certainly not anything to get worked up about.
Kieren
worked up
Worked up.............we all get worked up......people talk about suicide on here...clearly very passionate
Ok.........be the critic.............whos right for the Nominet board, who would you put your money on???
PS...I am no good at writing as I have been told on here...need a good freelancer...not many understand the web or me.
Lee
Worked up.............we all get worked up......people talk about suicide on here...clearly very passionate
Ok.........be the critic.............whos right for the Nominet board, who would you put your money on???
PS...I am no good at writing as I have been told on here...need a good freelancer...not many understand the web or me.
Lee
his -> is
I then made a comment on here - asking if that was something members in deliberating which way to vote would "consider a negative".
If I did raise any questions - they were not ones covered by your interview - but ones that go one step further.
*Does it matter to nominet members that Lord Erroll is in the position he is primarily due to the fact he has inherited a title?
*Is he credible? Is he an anacronism? Is he simply a joke? - Does the modern world (or the nominet board specifically) have a place for those with inherited titles.
Even after listening to your interview during which he denys it, I believe "Angus Hanton" is a single issue candidate. He has decided to run on "£4 not £5", and put that both ahead of everything else, and in his published statement to the exclusion of all else. His views on improving the DRS (less emphisis on trademarks) and improving communication (send all members the newsletter - if they want it or not) don't come accross as well developed.
I had listened to all your interviews prior to making my first post to this thread. I think you've made an excellent contribution to ensuring Nominet members are informed when they vote, as well as informing others who are interested.
I learnt that for the first time from your interview.
I then made a comment on here - asking if that was something members in deliberating which way to vote would "consider a negative".
If I did raise any questions - they were not ones covered by your interview - but ones that go one step further.
*Does it matter to nominet members that Lord Erroll is in the position he is primarily due to the fact he has inherited a title?
*Is he credible? Is he an anacronism? Is he simply a joke? - Does the modern world (or the nominet board specifically) have a place for those with inherited titles.
Even after listening to your interview during which he denys it, I believe "Angus Hanton" is a single issue candidate. He has decided to run on "£4 not £5", and put that both ahead of everything else, and in his published statement to the exclusion of all else. His views on improving the DRS (less emphisis on trademarks) and improving communication (send all members the newsletter - if they want it or not) don't come accross as well developed.
Kieren
Nominet Member
- Joined
- Sep 25, 2006
- Posts
- 63
- Reaction score
- 15
What a load of nonsense. No you hadn't and your sixth-form efforts at explaining it away through dodgy logic only make it more apparent.
Still I suspect you've listened to them now, and I hope this thread has caused some others to listen what the people standing have to say, and that really was the only point I was hoping to make and push.
Kieren
If you look back at my first post to this thread you will see that the only question I raised was how Nominet members would respond to the fact that one candidate's experience is mainly derived from their position as a heridatiry peer.
During your interview Lord Erroll openly admitted he was a heridatry peer (he stated this without any prompting from the interviewer), it's not something he's forthcomming about in his election statement.
The other statements are merely expressions of my own opinion.
During your interview Lord Erroll openly admitted he was a heridatry peer (he stated this without any prompting from the interviewer), it's not something he's forthcomming about in his election statement.
The other statements are merely expressions of my own opinion.
- Status
Similar threads
