Chris Chaundy [CChaundy§soulaustralia.com.au] wrote:
> While this makes perfect sense in a public for-profit company, where the
> primary responsibility of all directors is to act in the best interests of
> the shareholders (and complying with good corporate governance), auDA is a
> not-for-profit organization representing a community of mixed interests, and
> hence the directors acting in the interest of their respective stakeholders
> who elect them (supply and demand) may be dramatically opposed on some
> issues.

by law the directors of auda must act in the best interest of auda at
all times, the idea that directors "represent" any constituency is invalid.

the directors of auda work for auda and are paid by auda.

the class system is entirely a selection system and not a representational system.

It is the Industry Association position that the current structure is not
in alignment with idea of industry self regulation.

Looking at the length of tenure of demand and supply class directorships, it is
clear that demand class directors are able to entrench themselves
indefinitely with little cost or effort.

We have suggested as an interim measure that all directorships are
limited to 6 years.

I would prefer to see the classes abolished and demand class directors replaced
with independent directors who apply for advertised positions and are
selected on merit and the experience they bring to the table.

Vic Cinc
Domain Industry Association