This site was developed to support the Government 2.0 Taskforce, which operated from June to December 2009. The Government responded to the Government 2.0 Taskforce's report on 3 May 2010. As such, comments are now closed but you are encouraged to continue the conversation at

You’re on our new server

2009 July 18
by Taskforce Secretariat

Tonight we switched the site over to our new server.  We hope the disruption is at a minimum but if you do notice anything out of the ordinary, please let us know.

Some things we are already aware of:

  • Comments left on our old host after our migration will need to be readded.
  • As we’re no longer on the system, blog owners can associate their account with our new system using Open ID to simplify commenting.
  • Per article email notifications have ceased.  We hope to add this feature back very soon.
  • And finally, no video yet but soon!  You should be able to download any alternative version to your desktop though.
2 Responses
  1. 2009 July 28

    That’s great thanks. Looks good.

    Could you go into a bit more depth with this. Give us an idea of which network you are on. Ideally you will be hosted by aarnet, as the (NREN) network which is striving to offer the functionality available only to 39 unis and CSIRO at the moment.

    I’ll point you at the videos of the latest conference for network engineers in Oz. This page was where the live stream could be watched, and 5 mins later, the recordings.

  2. 2010 April 10
    Madeleine Kingston permalink

    I am a newcomer to Gov2 and SBR blogs, commencing posts on 1 April 2010 (SBR) and subsequently exploring the blog concept on various sections of the Gov2 Project.

    First forgive me for backtracking to old postings.

    Allow me to start this blog with a few technical questions.

    I assume that the posting to which I am responding “youre-on-our-new server 2009/07/18) was relevant at the time, but not applicable now.

    The reason for asking is that in searching for one of my own postings by undertaking an Australian-based Google search with inverted commas brought up the above posting which invited my curiosity to explore comment on anything that may have changed recently.

    I remain just a little confused so need to check

    Having registered with Gov2 and made a series of postings during this month, I assume that the directions given in the July posting no longer apply, but in case not please clarify on the Gov2 site.
    • Comments left on our old host after our migration will need to be re-added.
    Query: This I assume was applicable in July 2009 but now no longer relevant. Please confirm
    • As we’re no longer on the system, blog owners can associate their account with our new system using Open ID to simplify commenting.

    Query: Please explain further Open ID and what action if any newcomer bloggers like me to take if any – perhaps this is a matter for the Secretariat – but I am a bit lost with the instruction.

    Query: Will postings such as my very recent one by linked to Gov2. Should I repost the contents – as I am keen to draw attention to the matters mentioned below. Where would be the best place to do this given its focus on proposed changes to the Trade Practices Act (1974 (Cth) and widespread implications for trading competition and consumer protection and impacts on both social and economic infrastructure.

    Explanation: I recently registered with and made a response to the very topical issue of massive proposed changes to Australia’s competition and consumer laws heralding the demise of the Trade Practices Act in its current form (to be re-named Competition and Consumer ACT 2010) and amended under the Trade Practices Amendment (Australian Consumer Law) Bill 2009, with further amendments proposed under a second Bill under the Amendment (Australian Consumer Law) Bill (no.2) 2010 currently before the Senate Standing Committee on Economics with a deadline response of 16 April 2010

    See posting on

    My blog of 6 April ( was in response to an older posting by Julie Clarke posted on 2 July 2009 at 4:01 pm and is filed under Unfair Terms. Tagged: Unfair Terms. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

    Assuming that trackback meant comment retrospectively, and also noting that despite the date of Julie’s comment (2009) reference was made to very recent developments, I took the plunge and made my views known – especially with regard to significant discrepancies between proposed new generic and trade measurement laws and proposed and existing energy laws. I do not wish those comments to go astray and would be happy to repost on Gov2 with a little direction as to the post appropriate place.

    I have made a more extended posting recently on the CHOICE website (10 March 2010) following my attendance at the NEEF2 workshops preceding publication of the proposed new Energy Law and Rules, which will dilute and compromise consumer protection even before the ink and rubber stamp connect (SA Parliament Spring 2010). Meanwhile significant AEMC Rules Changes are in progress, without I believe due care and through as to implications for related matters and other jurisdictions.

    Julie Clarke’s very recent update of her 2009 posting is alarming and significant. See Time to split up the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth).

    By way of background Julie Clarke is an Australian lawyer (since 2001) as a PhD Candidate Qld University of Technology: topic The International Regulation of Transnational Mergers). She has a BA (Politics Major), Deakin 1997; LLB (Hons) Deakin (1998). She has one a number of distinctive awards.

    I hope Julie will consider also placing her recent and archived comments currently on directly on Gov2 where it may possibly receive enhanced coverage. I for one would like to follow this thread, especially as many of the references she has included refer to citations that I have myself relied upon and quoted in various arenas – such as those of Prof Luke Nottage, Prof Stephen Corones, Prof Sharon Christensen, Bill Duncan and Amanda Stickley.

    Alas the short timelines offered by the Senate Committee will mean very little chance for effective and comprehensive responses to me made in time – this task is on my list of things to do.
    Per article email notifications have ceased. We hope to add this feature back very soon.

    The Gov2 Secretariat have been sending me some per email updates of late directly to me personal email address, but not all.

    Query: Is this service ongoing? Do I need to request comment each time there are any changes to the Gov2 site. I am yet to learn how to use RSS feeds – but in the meantime wish to be kept informed.

    • And finally, no video yet but soon! You should be able to download any alternative version to your desktop though.

    Query: Will have to find out more about how to achieve this

    New matter:

    The SBR Blog site requires a log in and password. Moderation policies involve excluding any posting that contains an actual email site, even if directly related to Government sites or relevant matter. I swiftly corrected a moderated post in early April to the SBR Blog site be deleting the email link

    Query: Does this rule apply to Gov2.

    I am yet to learn how to place embedded links, but in the meantime would love to quote email links if pertinent and allowed. Please confirm and explain the rules for Gov 2 blogs in this regard.

    I will publish my personal story on Gov2 under Engagement as a cautionary tale. It is a story of persistence and disillusionment with current communication and consultative practices. Please use it to learn from since the theme of effective sustainable citizen engagement is crucial.

    I have written individually to numerous Ministers, many associated with energy (MCE for example) or consumer policy (CAV for example); to selected individuals at the National Measurement Institute, The Treasury; to key personnel at the ACCC and AER and have actively and relentless tried to call attention to general and specific concerns especially within generic and energy-specific regulations and redress matters – with minimal reward if any, since none of the issues I have persistently raised appear to have been heeded or so much as acknowledged.

    I am here because I want to see big changes to the way in which engagement with citizens can be achieved – and I am pinning very high hopes of the Gov2 Project and online dialogue, not merely to achieve effective provision of or exchange of information, but as the first step towards achieving real changes to government policy and practice in real life. The cyber initiatives should be seen as potentially powerful tools though which this may be achieved.

    See my story and highlights of current concerns under Engagement – to follow.

    In hope – and good faith


    Madeleine Kingston

    Individual Stakleholder

Comments are closed.