The Register is free to report on stories however it wishes. I would normally have approached the Reg with the story and offered to write it for them but I have a full-time job at the moment and just don’t have the time to do more than post to my blog.

Re: Jim Davies. I’ve not had any contact with him, although I have been looking around to see if he has been posting anywhere. I’ve not seen anything as yet.

With respect to this situation, I’m happy to explain why I think the Nominet management is more trustworthy in this case. What has struck me about Mr Davies’ statements is that his accusations have been vague, or irrelevant or carefully worded to give a particular impression. Their intent each time has been to undermine the CEO and the chairman rather than expose wrongdoing.

He has also publicly divulged what were clearly confidential discussions and I think that is only justifiable in a whistleblower situation – which I’m not convinced this is.

Nominet’s response on the other hand has been precise and its intent has been more to maintain confidence in Nominet that to defend its two lead people. Its statements also comes with the added weight that were details in them untrue, the company’s representatives would be punishable under the law.

Mr Davies’ made some sharp accusations on a private mailing list, most of which were then comprehensively refuted. If he wishes to expand on his accusations publicly and if he provides more precise details, then I would look into them. But I think that is unlikely to happen.

Kieren

Please could you tell me if you have emailed Mr Jim Davies to hear his view on this?

Also why is Chris Williams from El Reg letting you get the ’scoop’ on this story?

Cheers,
Andrew Bennett