<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<font face="Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif">Narelle, see comments
below.<br>
<br>
First of all - thank you for your email. I know how you feel,
trust me on that - been there, done that. <br>
</font><br>
On 3/22/2012 05:34, Narelle Clark wrote:
<blockquote
cite="mid:53065.203.41.172.18.1332408849.squirrel@secure6.throo.to"
type="cite">
It is great. We are building a really strong team that is
geographically
and culturally diverse with a tremendous range of expertise. It
makes us
stronger and more effective every day.
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">2. We are being told ISOC is considering changing their by-laws; we have
not been approached with any details for opinion or at list informed
about these changes. *Not so good.*
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">
ISOC indeed is still reviewing its bylaws. Frankly, the bylaws are broken.
They do not match the organisation as it does and should operate. This has</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
The by-laws were built for an organization that had members, who
voted. Then were changed for an organization, which had to,
basically, sell board seats to companies, so that it will not go
bankrupt. Today it's a $ 40 M / year organization, 60+ staff, which
requires totally different by-laws. <br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:53065.203.41.172.18.1332408849.squirrel@secure6.throo.to"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">
The next phase of the communications has to happen soon, and I want to
know how that best happens.
What path should that follow?
Webex?
INET session?</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
I cannot agree with you for an INET session to discuss by-laws
changes. If ISOC was having conferences regularly, with broad
membership participation - yes, but INET, which is supposed to be
more of a show-event? No. <br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:53065.203.41.172.18.1332408849.squirrel@secure6.throo.to"
type="cite">We need to understand the real issues here. There
needs to be some form of
agreement between the Society as an entity and its parts as to
what it
means to be affiliated. This is what that Letter is to do. We can
evolve
it, massage it, and even transform it, but in essence it needs to
be a
bottom line statement of what it means to be affiliated. If it
doesn't
then we can easily have groups claiming to be supporting our
ideals for an
open, affordable, accessible, ubiquitous Internet that REALLY
AREN'T and
NEVER will be.
The criticisms of the first drafts have been taken on board.
</blockquote>
<br>
The LoA is not a "form of agreement". It is logical to say that if
there's a LoA with the chapters, what's the text of LoA with the
organizational members? Would they agree to follow ISOC's
principles? Or would they, because they pay membership fee, rather
want ISOC to follow their principles? Interesting idea, what do you
say;-? <br>
There should be an exchange of letters, which state what both sides
agree upon. It should not be a directive from the top to the bottom.
Neither ISOC is the top, nor the chapters - the bottom. <br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:53065.203.41.172.18.1332408849.squirrel@secure6.throo.to"
type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">4. ISOC is running some projects, of which the chapters are not being
informed, that include following the ITU. We have learned that funding
for these projects does not come (only) from ISOC's funds. *Not good.*
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">
Feel free to fully inform me about this off list. I am happy to follow up.</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
Let's rather hear ISOC saying what exactly are doing; this should
not be secret, and plus, it will be reflected in the 990 form
anyway. <br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:53065.203.41.172.18.1332408849.squirrel@secure6.throo.to"
type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">6. The chapters continue to feel isolated from the decision-making at
ISOC, even when these decisions concern chapters and chapter members
(just one example - INET-2012). *Not good.*
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">
INET 2012 is a great looking conference and the staff are working their
backsides off to make this as successful as possible. It is coming
together more slowly than we'd hoped, and chapters are being engaged.
There is a whole day for chapters. Yes, there could be more. Yes, it could
be better.</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
Narelle, you may have missed the discussion about the paid
participation? INET is not a local, ISOC-only event. It seems to be
bigger. One more reasons chapters expressed concern with the
speakers at the opening panel, btw. <br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:53065.203.41.172.18.1332408849.squirrel@secure6.throo.to"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">ISOC wants the input and collaboration of these people - the reason ISOC
is such a success is because it manages to successfully use (indeed
leverage!) the strengths of its membership: chapters, organisations AND
individuals!</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
Allow me to disagree on the use of present tense. ISOC cannot claim
it is "such a success", because if it does, then it has turned into
a quasi-UN body, where every meeting is either "successful" or "very
successful". If ISOC believes they do not make mistakes, then it
will look as if it has turned into some kind of a religion. ISOC has
a lot to do, in order to "successfully use" the chapters, IMHO. <br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:53065.203.41.172.18.1332408849.squirrel@secure6.throo.to"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">7. ISOC is representing the technical community within the IGF/ITU
context. *Good*.
8. ISOC does not represent civil society - for an independent observer
it is an organization, which is heavily influence by its organizational
members (companies), not by individual members or chapters. *Good and
not so good*.
</pre>
<pre wrap="">
I'm not convinced I agree it is true that the organisations have a 'heavy'
influence. From where I sit, looking across both the organisational and
chapter forums, there are strengths and weaknesses in both.</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
We have raised that question - you cannot be seriously trying to
persuade us (and yourself!) that the organizational members, which
elect half of the Board can compare with the civil society, electing
only 3 board members (25 %). Not forgetting that the rest 25 % are
also elected by the technical community, which is not civil society,
or members. <br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:53065.203.41.172.18.1332408849.squirrel@secure6.throo.to"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">This point needs clarification - it's good that ISOC does not represent
civil society - there are many, who claim that, but ISOC is unique as
the home of the IETF. But it is not good that ISOC would not encourage
and empower its chapters to participate at the IGF/ITU meetings, as they
are indeed the ones, representing the civil society in their respected
countries.
</pre>
<pre wrap="">
Yup, I think we agree. [Though I can't see where ISOC has discouraged
people from participating in IGF meetings? My chapter is probably doing
the opposite.]</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
I wrote "encourage and empower" at IGF/ITU meetings. <br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:53065.203.41.172.18.1332408849.squirrel@secure6.throo.to"
type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">ISOC's policies towards the chapter have not improved dramatically, as
the expectations were last year at this time. *Not good.*
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">
Please write to me off list on more specific terms - I see tireless
Regional Bureau people and Chapter Liaison folk who are outstanding. And
more.</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
Yes, the people are great - I wrote you earlier, and you agreed
above. But I write about the ISOC policies towards the chapters.
Just take a look at this mailing list around Markus', Jacek's or
Walda's appointments. <br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:53065.203.41.172.18.1332408849.squirrel@secure6.throo.to"
type="cite">I'm hoping you will be pleasantly surprised by the
aspects of the bylaws
that are overdue for a change...
and I trust you will see that chapter representation in that
discussion
has been solid!
</blockquote>
<br>
I am already scared to think what we will face. <br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:53065.203.41.172.18.1332408849.squirrel@secure6.throo.to"
type="cite">
All the very best, and thank you Veni for keeping us honest!
Narelle
</blockquote>
<br>
Oh, no, I am not Fox News - they are the ones, who claim they keep
the politicians honest. I have spent five years on the Board of
Trustees, and have contributed to the development of the Internet in
my country, and beyond - I've earned my right to be critical of the
organization's policies, and especially when I see that these
policies often are at the expense of the chapters. I am sure you
will find a lot of people speaking in defense of the chapters, but
hardly anyone more passionate and with more experience than me.
That's why instead of waiting for ISOC to start doing something, we
at ISOC Bulgaria have moved quietly and with determination that
international Internet regulation requires us to bring our
experience - without the support of ISOC - on the table, and we have
asked other chapters to join us. <br>
<br>
What's happening in today's world, with regards to Internet
regulation, is not a game, it's a cruel reality, and I don't think
we, who are among the pioneers of the Internet, have the privilege
to stay on the side lines, and just pretend that nothing is
happening, or what is happening does not concern us. <b>I am
pleased to see that many chapters' leaders care about the way the
Internet will move, and that they don't want to see increased
regulation and control</b>. I am sure that ISOC is aligned with
the chapters in this, but their desire to stay "above" things is not
serving well the global Internet community, and the chapters. <br>
<br>
best,<br>
Veni <br>
<br>
Veni<br>
</body>
</html>