<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">+1 for you, and +1 for
Hans Peter.<br>
However, dear colleagues, <br>
I personally, and ISOC.bg active staffers, are quite busy in
trying to deal with the ITU-threat to the Internet. We cannot
possibly allocate time for this, and for the by-laws, neither can
we send someone to deal with the by-laws alone. <br>
I think the timing is pretty bad, and given all the remarks, I
personally cannot even ask any of my colleagues to engage more. <br>
We are running perhaps the second most important project in our
history of 17 years of existence, and we want to reach some
success. We are there alone, with only several supporting
organizations (ISOC does not contribute to our project; they
responded to our funding request last year that "it's too
ambitious", or too much international, if I remember correctly;-)
- sorry, but after Alejandro and Hans Peter's notes, I would just
wait to see what the BoT will decide. Clearly there are more than
two options, and it's their task, after all.<br>
<br>
best, <br>
veni<br>
<br>
</font>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 09/14/2012 20:05, Dr. Alejandro
Pisanty Baruch wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D483F54CA@W8-EXMB-DP.unam.local"
type="cite">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
charset=ISO-8859-1">
<style>
<!--
@font-face
{font-family:Wingdings}
@font-face
{font-family:Wingdings}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri}
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0cm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{color:blue;
text-decoration:underline}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{color:purple;
text-decoration:underline}
p.MsoListParagraph, li.MsoListParagraph, div.MsoListParagraph
{margin-top:0cm;
margin-right:0cm;
margin-bottom:0cm;
margin-left:36.0pt;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"}
span.E-MailFormatvorlage18
{font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:windowtext}
.MsoChpDefault
{font-size:10.0pt}
@page WordSection1
{margin:70.85pt 70.85pt 2.0cm 70.85pt}
ol
{margin-bottom:0cm}
ul
{margin-bottom:0cm}
-->
</style>
<style type="text/css" id="owaParaStyle"></style>
<div style="direction: ltr;font-family: Courier New;color:
#000000;font-size: 10pt;">
Hi all,
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I have re-read the draft several times and with different
questions in mind and have to agree with Hans Peter and others
who have preceded me in this list.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>The recognition of Chapters in the Bylaws is
unsatisfactory. </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>The definition of the Board's functions seems to me a
weakness too. It is mostly understood in the negative, i.e. by
substracting the President/CEO's functions from an imaginary
whole. This may actually be more a feature than a bug by
leaving the President's function delimited and the Board's
functions undefined. At times ISOC needs the Board to press
for precise or extensive policy definitions and to go far
beyond peeking at the accounting. Strong policy statements,
support for Chapters or other members or groupings within the
organization, etc., are good examples here.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>That said, I'll come back to the Chapters sections and
more, their absence. </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>One would think that at least some guidance about what
Chapters are and aren't, do or don't do, would be in the
Bylaws. It certainly should occur before we conclude - as we
might - that we are all better off with the Bylaws as they
stand in the present draft. A general statement of mutual
responsibility may appear at least in the document and
discussion track of the Bylaws and thus help orient the
interactions as we build the LoA's and other instruments. </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Further: we have elected three Trustees from the Chapter
vote. We have heard from Narelle and Rudi from time to time.
It would be very valuable if at least one of you could help us
with a summary of how you got to the conclusion that the
present draft is fine. An appearance from Monsieur Aina would
also be appreciated, esp. if we consider that we are well into
his term and some show of accountability would be a signal of
what the relation between Chapters and the rest of the
organization is going to be in a consequence of his
contributions as a Trustee.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Certainly we have a great subject for the upcoming meeting
of Chapter leaders and members in Toronto about a month from
now. Jacek, I don't think that we need to get creative about
the agenda of that meeting!!</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Yours,</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Alejandro Pisanty<br>
<div><br>
<div style="font-family:Tahoma; font-size:13px">
<div style="font-family:Tahoma; font-size:13px"><span
class="Apple-style-span" style="widows:2;
text-transform:none; text-indent:0px;
letter-spacing:normal; border-collapse:separate;
font:medium 'Times New Roman'; white-space:normal;
orphans:2; color:rgb(0,0,0); word-spacing:0px"><span
class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:arial;
font-size:small"><font face="Courier New" size="2">
</font></span></span></div>
<div style="font-family:Tahoma; font-size:13px"><span
class="Apple-style-span" style="widows:2;
text-transform:none; text-indent:0px;
letter-spacing:normal; border-collapse:separate;
font:medium 'Times New Roman'; white-space:normal;
orphans:2; color:rgb(0,0,0); word-spacing:0px"><span
class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:arial;
font-size:small"><font face="Courier New" size="2">!
!! !!! !!!!</font></span></span></div>
<div style="font-family:Tahoma; font-size:13px"><span
class="Apple-style-span" style="widows:2;
text-transform:none; text-indent:0px;
letter-spacing:normal; border-collapse:separate;
font:medium 'Times New Roman'; white-space:normal;
orphans:2; color:rgb(0,0,0); word-spacing:0px"><span
class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:arial;
font-size:small"></span></span><span
class="Apple-style-span" style="widows:2;
text-transform:none; text-indent:0px;
letter-spacing:normal; border-collapse:separate;
font:medium 'Times New Roman'; white-space:normal;
orphans:2; color:rgb(0,0,0); word-spacing:0px"><span
class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:arial;
font-size:small"><font face="Courier New" size="2">NEW
PHONE NUMBER - NUEVO NÚMERO DE TELÉFONO</font></span></span></div>
<p><span class="Apple-style-span" style="widows:2;
text-transform:none; text-indent:0px;
letter-spacing:normal; border-collapse:separate;
font:medium 'Times New Roman'; white-space:normal;
orphans:2; color:rgb(0,0,0); word-spacing:0px"><span
class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:arial;
font-size:small"></span></span> </p>
<p><span class="Apple-style-span" style="widows:2;
text-transform:none; text-indent:0px;
letter-spacing:normal; border-collapse:separate;
font:medium 'Times New Roman'; white-space:normal;
orphans:2; color:rgb(0,0,0); word-spacing:0px"><span
class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:arial;
font-size:small"><font face="Courier New" size="2">+52-1-5541444475
FROM ABROAD </font></span></span></p>
<p><span class="Apple-style-span" style="widows:2;
text-transform:none; text-indent:0px;
letter-spacing:normal; border-collapse:separate;
font:medium 'Times New Roman'; white-space:normal;
orphans:2; color:rgb(0,0,0); word-spacing:0px"><span
class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:arial;
font-size:small"><font face="Courier New" size="2">+525541444475
DESDE MÉXICO </font></span></span></p>
<p><span class="Apple-style-span" style="widows:2;
text-transform:none; text-indent:0px;
letter-spacing:normal; border-collapse:separate;
font:medium 'Times New Roman'; white-space:normal;
orphans:2; color:rgb(0,0,0); word-spacing:0px"><span
class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:arial;
font-size:small"><font face="Courier New" size="2">SMS
+525541444475 <br>
Dr. Alejandro Pisanty<br>
UNAM, Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico<br>
<br>
Blog: <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://pisanty.blogspot.com">http://pisanty.blogspot.com</a><br>
LinkedIn: <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty">http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty</a><br>
Unete al grupo UNAM en LinkedIn,
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614">http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614</a><br>
Twitter: <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://twitter.com/apisanty">http://twitter.com/apisanty</a><br>
---->> Unete a ISOC Mexico,
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.isoc.org">http://www.isoc.org</a><br>
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . </font></span></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #000000;
font-size: 16px">
<hr tabindex="-1">
<div id="divRpF292619" style="direction: ltr; "><font
color="#000000" face="Tahoma" size="2"><b>Desde:</b>
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:chapter-delegates-bounces@elists.isoc.org">chapter-delegates-bounces@elists.isoc.org</a>
[<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:chapter-delegates-bounces@elists.isoc.org">chapter-delegates-bounces@elists.isoc.org</a>] en nombre de
Hans Peter Dittler [<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:dittler@braintec-consult.de">dittler@braintec-consult.de</a>]<br>
<b>Enviado el:</b> viernes, 14 de septiembre de 2012
17:38<br>
<b>Hasta:</b> Chapter Delegates
(<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:chapter-delegates@elists.isoc.org">chapter-delegates@elists.isoc.org</a>)<br>
<b>Asunto:</b> [Chapter-delegates] my input to the
bylaws discussion<br>
</font><br>
</div>
<div>
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">Hello all,</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">(forgot to copy
to chapter delegates when send on Friday)</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">When receiving
the email from Eric and later from Ted about the
revised version of the proposed bylaws changes I had
big hopes for substantial progress.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">I am sure that
much effort went into the update so far and when
talking to Eric and Ted face to face (and everybody
else involved) I got the impression of a lot of
understanding and acceptance of the proposals made
earlier this year from members, chapters and
org-members.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">When reading the
revised proposal much of the anticipation and hope
dissolved away into nothing.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">Yes - there was
substantial change in some details –
</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">Chapters are for
example now clearly recognized -</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">But the main
line and direction is still the same.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">If you look
simply at the text there is a severe imbalance</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">7 pages about
the board of trustees</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">2 pages about
org members</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">1/2 page about
chapters</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">Less than 1/2
page about individual members</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">6 pages about
officers (which could be added to the board part)</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">Are members and
chapters really so much less important than the
board and the officers?</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">Or are the rules
for them so much simpler?</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">Part of it might
be due to the fact that most of the rules for
chapters and members are pushed to different papers
(letter of affiliation) and left to later decisions
of staff and board.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">This gives a
feeling of uncertainty – you do not know what is
coming up on you from the bylaws.
</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">I would expect
that orgs, members and chapters should find as much
consideration in the bylaws as staff and officers.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">It is somehow a
feeling of second class or less importance.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">Again I am not
sure if this can be repaired by changing a few words
in the bylaws. I am more and more convinced that a
deeper change needs to happen.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">I wish this
discussion would be a real discussion where
chapters, orgs and members would be part on equal
level and not only asked for input every 4 months or
so.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">Especially when
this input is to a large extend only put into some
storage after being read by the people tasked to do
the revisions.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">A few round
tables or some discussion would really make the
whole process more transparent and more trustworthy.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">I propose a much
more direct and open dialogue inviting and including
all parties that make up the Internet Society.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">Please include
all of us – we want to contribute and share.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">I attach my
points from May , as most of them are not reflected
in the current text or answered by some
communication.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">Summary of
remarks from first letter in May 2012</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">Global remarks:</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">Still open: </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">The discussion
about the update of the bylaws has sparked a lot of
talk about the overall situation of chapters and
members inside Internet Society.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">I believe it
would be a good idea to start a broader discussion
about the role of individual members, chapters and
organizational members.
</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">Still open: </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">There seems to
be quite a gap between what some individuals, some
chapters and some org-members expect from their role
inside Internet Society and what is echoed from
staff.
</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">The written as
well as the proposed text in the bylaws often
describes even another different scenario.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">There is also
quite a gap in many areas between what chapters and
members expect from staff and what staff
(constrained by personal or budget limits) is able
to deliver or is allowed to deliver.
</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">Still open: </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">I heard a strong
request from several sides to re-think the chosen
understanding of being “Cause-based”.
</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">We should have
the possibility to discuss different models, where
membership, chapters and org-members play a more
visible and more influencing role in the creation
and supervision of the long-term goals of the
Internet Society.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">Perhaps slight
changes in the current model would be sufficient to
improve the overall situation a lot.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">More specific
remarks to the proposed bylaws:</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">Still mostly
open: </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">I understand and
concur fully with the principle guideline to make
bylaws as slim as possible to avoid the high effort
and legal cost needed on revision.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">At the same time
I see the bylaws as something which defines
centrally large parts of the board, chapter, member
and org-member and staff roles and responsibilities.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">If central parts
of the responsibilities or role descriptions are
moved to other documents (example for chapters:
Society’s standards of performance), these
additional documents should listed explicitly in the
bylaws and their content and the change of it bound
in the bylaws to a rather high level of control and
revision, like a 2/3 majority vote of the board or
similar. None of these central definitions should be
changeable unilaterally by a simple staff decision.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">Still mostly
open: </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">Chapters,
members and org-members were praised high as central
parts of the Internet Society on several occasions
during the Inet in Geneva. Also the central role of
the IETF was mentioned over and over.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">I would propose
to mention those central aspects of the Internet
Society also in the first paragraph of the bylaws
side by side to the one sentence about the mission.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">Chapters:</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">Still open:</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">Even if the
bylaws now recognize chapters as their own entity
and the selection of board members is on the same
level for IETF, org-members and chapters, there is
still some imbalance.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">The org-members
shall have a yearly assembly – why nothing
comparable for chapters?</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">Still open:</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">As the actions
of staff are under final supervision by the board
and neither chapters nor members have any channel of
direct input to the board, there should be a
definition of such a channel in the bylaws.
Possibilities are:</span></p>
<p class="MsoListParagraph" style="text-indent:-18.0pt"><span
lang="EN-US"><span style="">-<span style="font:7.0pt
"Times New Roman"">
</span></span></span><span lang="EN-US">an
appeal-channel for staff actions or decisions on
members or chapters</span></p>
<p class="MsoListParagraph" style="text-indent:-18.0pt"><span
lang="EN-US"><span style="">-<span style="font:7.0pt
"Times New Roman"">
</span></span></span><span lang="EN-US">the
possibility for members, chapters and org-members to
request the attention of the board by putting some
item on the agenda of the next board meeting</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">Mostly closed:</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">Several chapters
have org-members as local members. This conflicts
with the proposed text.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">Members:</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">Still mostly
open:</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">The rights and
possibilities of members seem to be very limited in
the current text.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">As all
definitions about membership levels and fees for
individual or organizational members have now been
removed from the bylaws, I would propose again that
these rules should be moved to documents explicitly
listed in the bylaws and their content and the
change of it bound in the bylaws to a rather high
level of control and revision, like a 2/3 majority
vote of the board or similar. None of these
definitions of membership levels should be
changeable by a simple staff decision.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">Hans Peter
Dittler</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">Member of the
board</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">ISOC.DE</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">Internet Society
German Chapter e.V.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
As an Internet Society Chapter Officer you are automatically subscribed
to this list, which is regularly synchronized with the Internet Society
Chapter Portal (AMS): <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://portal.isoc.org">https://portal.isoc.org</a></pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>