<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<p>Thank you. A few clarificatory points and a reply, if i may ... <br>
</p>
<p>
<blockquote type="cite"> "... <i>by the time I started a
significant majority had already signed, suggesting to me that
whatever negotiation happened met their concerns</i>."</blockquote>
Yes, our chapter was one of those that signed; but again based on
assurances made by ISOC HQ during the calls/discussion that
alternative means would be made available to those chapters who do
not have a bank account in the chapter name. <br>
</p>
<p>
<blockquote type="cite">"... <i>since plainly the loss of many
chapters over such a dispute would have been bad for the
Internet Society</i> ..."<br>
</blockquote>
Correct, our understanding was that signing the Chapters Letter
was a sine qua non, and that those who did not sign would not only
be deprived of funding but also derecognized. <br>
</p>
<p>
<blockquote type="cite">"<i>One of the problems with recollection
is that it's not the same among everyone (even if everyone was
present)</i> ..."<br>
</blockquote>
Indeed, which is why i explicitly mentioned my "recalling", by way
of an invitation to others to comment on, challenge, or correct my
recollection. Noting also that all calls are recorded by ISOC HQ
and thus available for review, even by those who were not present
on a particular call; these would certainly have been reviewed by
ISOC HQ management. <br>
</p>
<p>
<blockquote type="cite">"<i>Regardless, I believe that it _would_
be possible, under the current chapter engagement letter
arrangements, for a chapter to find a home inside an NGO who
can provide the requisite financial shelter</i>."</blockquote>
Thank you for this, it is at least an avenue that we can explore,
as contrasted against previous responses which insisted on a bank
account in the chapter's name. <br>
</p>
<p>
<blockquote type="cite">"<i>I am quite confident that the "two or
more chapter officers" approach is not acceptable given the
constraints under which we work.</i>"
</blockquote>
This is regrettable as i do recall this option being mentioned
(again, i do invite comment, challenge or correction of my
recollection.) Any such options or alternatives to the hard
requirement of a bank account in the chapters name will certainly
have factored into chapters' acquiescence at the time on that
difficult sticking point. <br>
</p>
<p>As "difficult" as that point is, this is the reason i asked -- <i>if
there is a strict prohibition against ISOC HQ funding chapters
that are not legally-registered, or whether this is something
else such as a risk mitigation measure</i>? <br>
<br>
</p>
<p>
<blockquote type="cite">I have read this thread many times as well
as the chapter engagement letter form, and I do not see this
claim. Can you point it out to me, please?
</blockquote>
Yes. I was referring to Christine's reply to a specific question i
posed regarding those chapters who were already able to procure a
bank account in the chapter's name but do not have legally
incorporated status, thus ... <br>
<blockquote type="cite">"<i>In most cases, a local legal
registration is needed for the bank to be able to open a bank
account in the name of the Chapter. However, in some countries
it is possible to constitute a group that doesn’t need a
legal registration in order to be able to open a Chapter bank
account. In South Africa for example, it is possible to
create "Voluntary Associations" that can open bank accounts in
the name of their entity without any formal legal
registration. Chapters who operate in a similar legal context
are invited to reach out to us by contacting Stine Philipsen</i>
..." <br>
</blockquote>
The question then being -- would even these chapters now be
required to legally incorporate? <br>
<br>
</p>
<p>I would also appreciate a comment on my question regarding your
suggestion that Chapters form a working group to take-up the
matter of the Chapters Letter, including specifically the bank
account requirement -- <i>if we were to relegate the matter to a
(assume ChAC) working group, would any such discussions or
subsequent recommendations from ChAC actually be able to change
the decisions made by ISOC HQ, particularly the hard requirement
for legal incorporation</i>? <br>
</p>
<p>Again, thanking you for your time (particularly during weekends),
<br>
</p>
<p>WYn<br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 12 Jul 2020 12:40 pm, Andrew
Sullivan via Chapter-delegates wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:20200712044025.egfay7bicotvkvug@outlook.office365.com">Hi,
<br>
<br>
On Sat, Jul 11, 2020 at 05:15:59PM +0800, Winthrop Yu via
Chapter-delegates wrote:
<br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">IIRC, the "Chapters Letter" was largely a
top-down set of conditions set by ISOC HQ. If there were any
compromises made on the Chapter Letter, i do not recall them at
the moment and would appreciate being reminded of them.
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
I'm afraid I can't speak about the negotiations: I was not a party
to them, since they generally happened before I joined the
Internet Society staff. What I do know is that chapters were then
and remain independent organizations, and by the time I started a
significant majority had already signed, suggesting to me that
whatever negotiation happened met their concerns. After all, if
not, they would not have signed, since plainly the loss of many
chapters over such a dispute would have been bad for the Internet
Society and therefore the management of the time would have taken
concerns into account.
<br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">During one of those calls i recall ISOC HQ
(Chrstine?) mentioning that alternatives would be provided for
this "bank account in the chapters' name" requirement. Again
IIRC, "alternatives" mentioned included possibly coursing funds
thru a fully and legally registered NGO in that country (perhaps
somewhat similar to the "fiscal sponsorship" mentioned by Judith
and Joly)' or to a bank account jointly in the name of two or
more chapter officers certified by that chapter.
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
One of the problems with recollection is that it's not the same
among everyone (even if everyone was present), so I just couldn't
speak to what you remember even if I'd been on that call.
Regardless, I believe that it _would_ be possible, under the
current chapter engagement letter arrangements, for a chapter to
find a home inside an NGO who can provide the requisite financial
shelter. I believe (but cannot confirm) that this is a funds-flow
model that has been used successfully by other US 501(c)(3)
charities. Chapters are independent organizations, and the
effects of the law between the US and any other country is not
something I feel competent to speculate about, but I suspect this
model is something that needs to be worked out case by case. I am
also reasonably confident (but not certain, and I'm working to get
better information) that it would not be acceptable for the
Internet Society itself to be facilitating that relationship. I
am quite confident that the "two or more chapter officers"
approach is not acceptable given the constraints under which we
work.
<br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">yet now we are informed that even those
chapters who do already have a bank account in their name but
are not formally registered as a "legal organization" may be
denied funding.
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
I have read this thread many times as well as the chapter
engagement letter form, and I do not see this claim. Can you
point it out to me, please?
<br>
<br>
Best regards,
<br>
<br>
A
<br>
<br>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>