<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"><head><meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=utf-8"><meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 12 (filtered medium)"><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.EmailStyle17
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]--></head><body lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=purple><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>Thanks for this.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><br>Regarding comment (1), I believe that the current language correctly reflects the current respective roles of staff and members, because staff reports directly to the Board, and it is the Board that makes decisions.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>Best,<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>Richard<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><div style='border:none;border-left:solid blue 1.5pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 4.0pt'><div><div style='border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in'><p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>From:</span></b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'> Chapter-delegates [mailto:chapter-delegates-bounces@elists.isoc.org] <b>On Behalf Of </b>Satish Babu<br><b>Sent:</b> Monday, August 22, 2016 06:15<br><b>To:</b> CW Mail<br><b>Cc:</b> Chapter Delegates<br><b>Subject:</b> Re: [Chapter-delegates] ChAC Decision Needed: Proposal for greater Chapter participation in developing position & policy briefs<o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'>Thanks for this initiative. I consider it very relevant. Some comments:<br><br>1. "...with the understanding that staff retains full ownership for the final version" is overstating the case a bit. Although there is no question that Staff have to steer the document through multiple consultations with members (and other stakeholders) to reach a final version, the current language ("full ownership") does not seem to acknowledge the sovereign role of the membership. Perhaps a milder reformulation that balances the respective roles of staff and members would help.<o:p></o:p></p></div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'>2. Although it's somewhat on a tangent, I would also like to point out that there is a very real gap in countries where there are multiple Internet Society Chapters without a 'national' chapter. For instance, India has five local ISOC chapters, but no national chapter nor a national co-ordination body. In many countries, there is a role for a country-level civil society organization for Internet-related aspects that can liaise, co-ordinate and work in other ways with the national government. This is perhaps a good role for an ISOC Chapter (or other grouping ISOC structure made of members/chapters). The risk is that if ISOC does not provide such a structure, other non-ISOC structures/organizations will emerge to claim this space. <br><br><br><br><br><br><o:p></o:p></p></div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'>satish<br><br><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal>On Mon, Aug 22, 2016 at 3:10 AM, CW Mail <<a href="mailto:mail@christopherwilkinson.eu" target="_blank">mail@christopherwilkinson.eu</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Good evening:<br><br>I have read the proposal for greater involvement of Chapters …<br>In general I support this initiative, based as it is on one of the primary objectives of the Chapters' Advisory Council as proposed in 2010.<br><br>I would however suggest that the role of the ISOC staff is overstated in the proposed text.<br><br>(a) ISOC staff should act as the secretariat for the membership.<br><br>(b) In most areas of policy, particularly those with a regional or national dimension, the staff do not have any better professional or political appreciation than our membership.<br><br>( c) It must be made quite clear by the staff that they do not intend to use their safeguards in the present draft text to override the opinion of the Chapters concerned.<br><br>(d) Interested Chapters should take the initiative to prepare relevant policy statements for the Internet Society either regionally or globally.<br><br>Regards<br><br>CW<o:p></o:p></p><div><div><p class=MsoNormal><br><br>On 19 Aug 2016, at 21:11, avri doria <<a href="mailto:avri@acm.org">avri@acm.org</a>> wrote:<br><br>> Dear ChAC delegates,<br>><br>> The ChAC Steering Committee has reviewed "A proposal for greater<br>> involvement of Chapters in the position and policy brief development<br>> process" (below & attached) and is submitting it to the Chapter Council<br>> for approval.<br>><br>> Decisions by the ChAC are governed by the Rules & Procedure paragraph 6<br>><br>>> Substantive decisions, in particular regarding advice and<br>>> recommendations, shall be made by the AC. Decisions may be made by<br>>> electronic means (e.g. E-Mail, electronic voting systems, etc.) or<br>>> during remote (audio/video conferencing) or physical meetings.<br>>> Decisions shall normally be taken by consensus (meaning lack of formal<br>>> opposition). If consensus cannot be achieved, then the Chair of the AC<br>>> Steering Committee shall organize a vote. In case of voting, decisions<br>>> shall be taken by a majority vote of the delegates to the AC. The<br>>> quorum shall be nineteen (19) delegates. In case of tie, the matter<br>>> will be resubmitted for discussion and a new vote. Votes will be<br>>> secret. The tally of votes (for, against, abstain, did not vote) will<br>>> be published. Abstentions will be counted towards determining the quorum.<br>><br>> At this point I would like to open discussion on this proposal for the<br>> next week - until 8/27 1200 UTC. At that point I will initiate a<br>> consensus call on the document, including any changes that may be<br>> warranted as part of the discussion. This consensus call will also be<br>> scheduled for 1 week. Should the document not meet with consensus, I<br>> will then request that we continue discussion on it and will bring it to<br>> a vote.<br>><br>> Thank you<br>><br>> Avri Doria<br>><br>> (for the ChAC SC)<br>><br>><br>> -----<br>><br>> *A proposal for greater involvement of Chapters in the position and<br>> policy brief development process*<br>><br>> *Background*<br>><br>> In the past, there have been occasions when ISOC staff met with national<br>> policy makers without involving the national chapter in any way. Since<br>> national chapters often have good relations with national officials, it<br>> would be preferable if the chapters are also involved in meetings with<br>> national officials. We propose a recommendation below to that effect.<br>><br>> At present, there does not seem to be a consistent practice within ISOC<br>> regarding the role of the membership in the policy development<br>> process and the preparation of background and position papers that ISOC<br>> puts forward. Specifically, some policy papers are submitted to the<br>> membership for comment, specifically the policy briefs, while others<br>> papers, such as position papers, are not. In one case, the membership<br>> was not informed of a specific submission. It appears to us that<br>> systematic consultation with the membership can only improve the quality<br>> of a policy, background paper, or position paper. The intent is not to<br>> change ISOC's current decision-making process for such papers: staff<br>> would remain fully responsible for the final version of the paper. The<br>> intent is to allow staff to benefit systematically from the views of the<br>> membership, and to decide whether or how to incorporate comments from<br>> the membership. We propose a recommendation below to that effect.<br>><br>><br>> *Recommendations*<br>><br>> Review with the relevant chapters, policy positions and alliances before<br>> they are made, and inform them of meetings with national policy<br>> makers, unless time constraints do not permit it. We have active mailing<br>> lists that can make it quick and easy.<br>><br>> In general, policy, background and position papers, including policy<br>> briefs should be submitted to the membership for comment prior to<br>> publication, with the understanding that staff retains full ownership<br>> for the final version. Staff can choose the most appropriate method to<br>> consult the membership, for example by asking for volunteers to review<br>> drafts, by posting a draft for comment to a mailing list, by convening a<br>> virtual meeting to discuss the issues, etc.<br>><br>> Further, when papers are published and/or submitted to some entity<br>> outside ISOC, the membership should be informed and a link to the paper<br>> should be sent to the appropriate mailing list and to the Chapter<br>> Delegate's mailing list just prior to the publication or submission.<br>><br>><br>><br>><br>> ---<br>> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.<br>> <a href="https://www.avast.com/antivirus" target="_blank">https://www.avast.com/antivirus</a><o:p></o:p></p></div></div><p class=MsoNormal>> <A proposal for greater involvement of C...brief development process on Box Notes.pdf>_______________________________________________<o:p></o:p></p><div><div><p class=MsoNormal>> As an Internet Society Chapter Officer you are automatically subscribed<br>> to this list, which is regularly synchronized with the Internet Society<br>> Chapter Portal (AMS): <a href="https://portal.isoc.org" target="_blank">https://portal.isoc.org</a><br><br>_______________________________________________<br>As an Internet Society Chapter Officer you are automatically subscribed<br>to this list, which is regularly synchronized with the Internet Society<br>Chapter Portal (AMS): <a href="https://portal.isoc.org" target="_blank">https://portal.isoc.org</a><o:p></o:p></p></div></div></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div></div></div></body></html>