Quoting Sylvester Max on Friday March 22, 2002:
| Yesterday, I posted what I believed to be a valid question, but no one
| answered it. Maybe you were all to busy planning BBQ's. (Not that there is
| anything wrong with BBQ's, they help facilitate discussion and put faces to
| the people you deal with.) 

This is a general discussion mailing list. I wouldn't email here
expecting an answer on anything. Especially as you identified it is
something that has been brought up time and time again on this list.

If you want an official answer from auDA, for example, you should email
auDA.

| It seems to me that some "provisionally accredited registrars," are
| misleading the public and should be reprimanded . (I was warned yesterday,
| off the record, that I can't mention names, as a certain company is directed
| by a team of lawyers and will sue me at the first opportunity!)

Provisionally accredited means just that. It is no reflection
on what they are doing now, rather that they fulfilled the
requirements for provisional accreditation which are detailed at
http://www.auda.org.au/transition/ to operate under the new regime. It
is not a subjective assessment on how they operate today.

At the risk of being descended upon by "a team of lawyers", auDA can't
just not approve a company because no-one likes them. If they breach
their conditions in the new regime, then auDA has cause to act and
revoke accreditation. Resellers are presently governed by Melbourne IT,
not auDA.

| It also seems to me that this may not be the best place to voice my concerns
| and if no one can answer my questions I will take it up with the senator for
| communication and the arts.

Seeing as you cc'd this email to his email address, surely you already
have taken it up with him?

I might add, I think most of your questions - if not all - can be
answered by reading up on auDA's website.

kim