[AusNOG] So, who is joining iiNet?

[Brad Peczka]

The ACS have also self-declared that you need to be a member in order to work in the IT industry...

...and look how far they've got with that. 

The ACS isn't an appropriate mouthpiece for this kind of issue because they've successfully managed to become irrelevant to most people who work in the broader industry. Organisations like WAIA and SAGE-AU on the other hand, who have lobbied and advocated on behalf of their respective memberships in the past (and who are hugely relevant in this space), would seem to be a more natural fit.

Regards,
-Brad.
________________________________________
From: AusNOG [ausnog-bounces at lists.ausnog.net] On Behalf Of Mark Walkom [markw at campaignmonitor.com]
Sent: Thursday, 12 June 2014 9:51 AM
To: ausnog at lists.ausnog.net
Subject: Re: [AusNOG] So, who is joining iiNet?

The ACS have self-declared themselves it would seem.

Regards,
Mark Walkom

Infrastructure Engineer
Campaign Monitor
email: markw at campaignmonitor.com<mailto:markw at campaignmonitor.com>
web: www.campaignmonitor.com<http://www.campaignmonitor.com>


On 12 June 2014 11:45, Jake Anderson <yahoo at vapourforge.com<mailto:yahoo at vapourforge.com>> wrote:
Who is the "internet lobbyist company" in Australia?

On 12/06/14 11:27, Kim Davies wrote:
Quoting Burt Mascareigne on Wednesday June 11, 2014:
| Soooo.... How does the will of the people get heard?  Do I have to go and get my pitchfork?

On one side of this issue you have a co-ordinated industry that is
actively trying to effect change and has shown an unwillingness to give
up.

On the other side you have a group that is generally content to mind
their own business, only pipes up in a semi-coordinated fashion for a
short spell in opposition, and then goes back to their knitting.

I'd suggest to make inroads this community may want to do more of the
former than the latter. Even if it is just to maintain equilibrium to
guard the status quo, the notion that you just need to fight back with a
letter or a petition sporadically is probably naive.

Where is the competing tension in legislators' minds that there is an
open Internet that needs to be preserved in order to bring its immense
societal benefits? Where is the constant pressure from the industry
to drive the discussion in the opposite direction, pushing for legal
frameworks that afford more protections to ISPs rather than less?
Wouldn't it be good not to be on the back foot all the time?

Don't reach for a pitchfork. Change the playing field.

kim

_______________________________________________
AusNOG mailing list
AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net<mailto:AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net>
http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog

_______________________________________________
AusNOG mailing list
AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net<mailto:AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net>
http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog