<!DOCTYPE html>
<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<p>Thank you for this Olivier. Indeed, Chapters would be interested
in the topics you raise.</p>
<p>I have no additional topics (yours are quite comprehensive), just
a few comments, if i may: <br>
</p>
<p>
<blockquote type="cite">Topic 1: CEO renewal
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">1.3 Is there an already existing process
in place for the search of the next CEO?
</blockquote>
Ah yes, i recently re-shared ISOC's farewell post to Lynn, it's
been 10 years.</p>
<p>
<blockquote type="cite">1.4 In the current climate of Government
regulation worldwide would you agree that people with known
close ties to governments should be excluded from being
candidates as they are unlikely to inspire confidence in ISOC's
independence in representative roles other than purely
secretariat?
</blockquote>
We tend to focus negatively almost exclusively on Governments
(holy shades of WCIT), should there also be caution with regard to
ties with the Private Sector? That is -- shouldn't we be wary of
and avoid, revolving door, i-scratch-your-back-you-scratch-mine
favor-peddling, secret deals behind closed doors, and such? <br>
Anent that, this would certainly be helpful: <br>
<blockquote type="cite"> b. the list of qualities required in the
next CEO?
<br>
(as is already common process in other I* organisations?)
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
</p>
<p>
<blockquote type="cite">ISOC's intentions on formation of the
Foundation was to establish a separate Board and governance for
the Foundation. It was proposed that the current arrangement of
ISOC trustees also all being Foundation Trustees as only viable
as a stop gap. The evolution of the governance of the Foundation
appears to have stalled since the attempted sale of PIR.
<br>
2.2 What processes to involve the broader community are being
undertaken? <br>
</blockquote>
+1<br>
<br>
</p>
<p>
<blockquote type="cite">3.2.1.1 What kind of threats are in the
cross-wires of this action item? Threats from UN? Globally?
Individual Governments (at national level)? Regionally (for
example European Commission)? Private Sector (for example
Network Neutrality or consolidation of Internet resources and
monopolies)? There number of threats to the Internet are
numerous.
</blockquote>
Yes, we should no longer be silent about threats from Private
Sector actors, e.g. Network Neutrality, Big Tech, Privacy (and
soon AI?) <br>
</p>
<p>
<blockquote type="cite">3.2.3 Is ISOC planning to reinvigorate the
I* and working with the Internet technical community as a whole
to mitigate these challenges?
</blockquote>
+1 <br>
</p>
<p>
<blockquote type="cite">4.2.1 Does ISOC have a rulebook regarding
engagement relating to Internet policy and advocacy in countries
where there is a local Chapter?
<br>
4.2.2 How does ISOC align itself with the positions taken by a
local chapter in a specific territory when ISOC in intervening
directly in that territory? For example, your visit in the UK is
triggered by your participation at a conference. How will you
align your narrative with the Chapter's narrative?
</blockquote>
+1<br>
</p>
<p>Again, thank you Olivier and hoping to hear of
developments/answers, <br>
</p>
<p>WYn<br>
PH<br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 9 Feb 2024 10:31 PM, Olivier MJ
Crépin-Leblond via Chapter-delegates wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:ac5341bf-6fe4-41e7-949e-f7d0468fe937@gih.com">Dear
Chapter Leaders,
<br>
<br>
the UK England Chapter of the Internet Society has been kindly
invited to meet the ISOC CEO Andrew Sullivan during his visit in
London later this month. We have put together an agenda which you
will see below. If we have any time remaining in our meeting we
would be happy to add other topics of interest to Chapters - thus
please email me if you would like to propose additional topics.
<br>
<br>
We'll report back to Chapters on matters that might have a wider
Chapters interest after our meeting.
<br>
Kindest regards,
<br>
<br>
Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhD
<br>
ISOC UK England Chair
<br>
<br>
<br>
-------- Forwarded Message --------
<br>
Subject: Proposed agenda for ISOC CEO and ISOC UK England
Leadership Team meeting - 20 Feb 2024
<br>
Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2024 15:20:15 +0100
<br>
From: Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:ocl@gih.com"><ocl@gih.com></a>
<br>
To: Andrew Sullivan <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:sullivan@isoc.org"><sullivan@isoc.org></a>
<br>
CC: ISOC England <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:contact@isoc-e.org"><contact@isoc-e.org></a>
<br>
<br>
Dear Andrew,
<br>
<br>
thank your for inviting us to meet you on Tuesday 20 February
2024. Matthew Shears, Steve Karmeinski and I look forward to
welcome you in London.
<br>
<br>
In order to prepare for the discussion, our Leadership Team has
put together a number of questions which you will find listed
below. These should be treated as the topics we would like to
discuss during our meeting. We'll share these with other Chapter
Leaders, asking if they have any further questions/topics which we
might wish to add to our agenda, time-permitting.
<br>
<br>
In order to put some structure in our discussions, there are four
main section topics:
<br>
<br>
1. CEO renewal
<br>
2. Internet Society Foundation
<br>
3. ISOC's future
<br>
4. Operational Issues
<br>
<br>
We look forward to an open discussion on all four topics. If you
have additional topics for discussion please share them with us
ahead of our meeting.
<br>
<br>
Topic 1: CEO renewal
<br>
<br>
Given the need to expand the global reputation and footprint of
the Internet Society, the search for the next CEO should respect
the processes set in the past as well as well accepted good
practise
<br>
found in other important Internet organisations.
<br>
<br>
This process should be tasked by the BoT to improve awareness and
engagement of the global communities in the Internet Society and
its operations and ensure to the community that basic principles
of good governance including transparency are evident.
<br>
<br>
We therefore have the following questions relating to the topic of
CEO renewal:
<br>
<br>
1.1 Do you already know if the Board going to renew your contract?
<br>
<br>
1.2 If not when will process for the CEO search be started?
<br>
<br>
1.3 Is there an already existing process in place for the search
of the next CEO?
<br>
1.3.1 if yes, then is it based on the last search for ISOC CEO
which used a global selection process open to qualification by
non-US residents?
<br>
1.3.2 if no, then will the community be asked for:
<br>
a. best practices relating to the actual search for a CEO?
<br>
b. the list of qualities required in the next CEO?
<br>
(as is already common process in other I* organisations?)
<br>
<br>
1.4 In the current climate of Government regulation worldwide
would you agree that people with known close ties to governments
should be excluded from being candidates as they are unlikely to
inspire confidence in ISOC's independence in representative roles
other than purely secretariat?
<br>
<br>
1.5 Currently the Board Succession Planning Committee is made of:
<br>
Ramanou Biaou - Chapters
<br>
Luis Martinez - Chapters
<br>
Brian Haberman - IETF
<br>
Ted Hardie - Organisation
<br>
Barry Leiba - Organisation
<br>
Robert Pepper - Organisation
<br>
Andrew Sullivan - Ex-Officio
<br>
<br>
This, if it is indeed the next CEO Search Committee, appears
unbalanced between Chapters, IETF and Organisation members?
Wouldn't good practise mean balancing this out by having two
members from each IETF, Chapters and Organisation?
<br>
<br>
1.6 Will the whole Board interview candidates or will it just be
the Board Succession Planning Committee?
<br>
<br>
1.7 Will the whole Board be voting on the final candidate(s),
given that this has been a vital task of the Board in past CEO
selections? The whole board consists of: 4 Chapter Trustees, 4 Org
Trustees and 4 IETF Trustees (plus a nominated trustee) and each
of them has one equal vote.
<br>
<br>
<br>
Topic 2: Internet Society Foundation
<br>
<br>
ISOC's intentions on formation of the Foundation was to establish
a separate Board and governance for the Foundation. It was
proposed that the current arrangement of ISOC trustees also all
being Foundation Trustees as only viable as a stop gap. The
evolution of the governance of the Foundation appears to have
stalled since the attempted sale of PIR.
<br>
<br>
Given that the current arrangement causes a serious conflict of
interest between the organisations:
<br>
<br>
2.1 What are the current steps being made to move this along? When
will a new Board be selected?
<br>
<br>
2.2 What processes to involve the broader community are being
undertaken?
<br>
<br>
<br>
Topic 3: ISOC's future
<br>
<br>
It is notable that in relation to other Internet organisations
referred to as I* including IETF, ICANN, IAB, Regional Internet
Registries. ISOC alone today has no operational responsibilities
for Internet resources, networks, or governance communities. This
has frequently led to comments by operators in those communities
to ask "What is the point of ISOC"?
<br>
<br>
3.1 What is the Point of ISOC today and into the next five years
in the CEO's view?
<br>
3.1.1 Is there a 5 year strategic plan in place?
<br>
<br>
3.2 2024 Action Plan
<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.internetsociety.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/12/2024-Action-Plan-EN.pdf">https://www.internetsociety.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/12/2024-Action-Plan-EN.pdf</a>
<br>
<br>
Focussing on two topics:
<br>
3.2.1 countering Internet threats
<br>
3.2.1.1 What kind of threats are in the cross-wires of this action
item? Threats from UN? Globally? Individual Governments (at
national level)? Regionally (for example European Commission)?
Private Sector (for example Network Neutrality or consolidation of
Internet resources and monopolies)? There number of threats to the
Internet are numerous.
<br>
3.2.1.2 At what "layer" are these threats mostly going to be?
<br>
3.2.1.3 How are these threats going to be decided? Which threat is
"more important"? Which threat has priority?
<br>
<br>
3.2.2 defending the Internet in the UN.
<br>
This outward facing element of ISOC's advocacy has been missing in
the past and it would be good to understand what this will
comprise, particularly w/r/t IG.
<br>
Could you please elaborate on what processes will be followed?
IGF? WSIS? UNGA (with the UN Digital Cooperation Forum)? ECOSOC?
UNESCO?
<br>
<br>
3.2.3 Is ISOC planning to reinvigorate the I* and working with the
Internet technical community as a whole to mitigate these
challenges?
<br>
<br>
3.3 ISOC Financials
<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.internetsociety.org/about-internet-society/organization-reports/#financial-reports">https://www.internetsociety.org/about-internet-society/organization-reports/#financial-reports</a>
<br>
2022 Financial Statements show the Internet Society making a loss
for that year.
<br>
<br>
3.3.1 Is there oversight and reporting that is specific to keeping
track of the proportion of .org revenues being spent on internal
administration and staff compared to funding community works?
<br>
The annual financial statements do not show this.
<br>
3.3.2 With other I* organisations providing detailed information
about the management of their projects as well as per department
cross-referencing, is ISOC prepared to rise up to the levels of
transparency that are now expected in public benefit entities and
to produce an annual financial report that provides more
information than its minimal published financial statement?
<br>
3.3.3 Is ISOC ready to publish its financials on multi-year
projects including its forecasts going forward? Scrutiny of Form
990 appears to show random continuity year on year and there is no
way to find out what is happening?
<br>
<br>
3.4 MANRS
<br>
ISOC made a total divestment of its MANRS project to a US
not-for-profit, The Global Cyber Alliance (GCA) which has
foundational links to the City Police in UK and other similar
agencies.
<br>
<br>
3.4.1 Why was this divestiture effected given that this was a
successful project which comforted the ISOC brand as being
pertinent?
<br>
<br>
3.4.2 Was a risk assessment done prior to moving MANRS elsewhere
to an organisation so close to law enforcement as to ensuring that
the Internet Society goals and principles in this important area
remain at the top of the routing security agenda?
<br>
<br>
3.4.3 By what criteria was the GCA chosen as an suitable
organisation to run the MANRS project? Were there conditions
imposed on Goals?
<br>
<br>
3.4.4 Are there Performance Agreements (SLAs) in place for the
ongoing conditional funding of the GCA?
<br>
3.4.4.1 If yes, are there clauses to cancel the GCA Secretarial
and Operational duties, should it fail in its SLAs?
<br>
<br>
3.5 Concept of the Internet Society holding network related
patents
<br>
<br>
In a recent conversation on the Internet History Mailing List,
Karl Auerbach proposed that ISOC or the IETF established an arm
that could accept and hold network related patents and issue
licenses (for reasonable low fees and non-discriminatory terms).
Vint Cerf replied that he liked the idea and that the concept of
ISOC being compensated for doing so could ease its challenge
demonstrating the level of public support it has (the so-called
IRS Public Support Test) that requires it to show that at least
1/3 of its income comes from a broad range of public sources.
<br>
Would you consider this as a potential responsibility to evolve
ISOC?
<br>
<br>
<br>
Topic 4: Operational Issues
<br>
<br>
4.1 New Chapter Membership Administration System
<br>
<br>
After more than one month in existence it is clear that the new
Chapter Membership Administration System is failing to achieve the
functions it was meant to achieve:
<br>
a. emailing members
<br>
b. hosting fora for community discussions like the Chapter
Advisory Council discussions and other fora
<br>
<br>
To-date the failure of the emailing system is such that even ISOC
Staff have been unable to use it for any campaign whatsoever.
<br>
The discussion fora are completely empty. The porting of old
discussions has lost all formatting, attached documents etc.
Functions like the emailing of the fora discussions are non
existent.
<br>
The system appears to require lots of pre-established templates
none of which are available.
<br>
The list of problems is too long to list here but the result is a
loss of community history as well as a complete hindrance on
membership management at Chapter level. ISOC is without a
communications tool - a tool that should have been at the centre
of its operations and that has failed to deliver.
<br>
<br>
4.1.1 What is ISOC planning to do to fix this serious problem?
<br>
4.1.2 How long will it take to fix?
<br>
4.1.3 If the system is "born dead" would ISOC consider finding an
alternative system and dropping the current system on the basis
that it is a failure and immediately proposing an alternative?
<br>
<br>
4.2 Relationship between Chapters and HQ in matters of national
importance
<br>
<br>
4.2.1 Does ISOC have a rulebook regarding engagement relating to
Internet policy and advocacy in countries where there is a local
Chapter?
<br>
4.2.2 How does ISOC align itself with the positions taken by a
local chapter in a specific territory when ISOC in intervening
directly in that territory? For example, your visit in the UK is
triggered by your participation at a conference. How will you
align your narrative with the Chapter's narrative?
<br>
<br>
--- end of agenda ---
<br>
<br>
Thank you for considering these topics. We look forward to a
fruitful meeting with you.
<br>
Safe travels,
<br>
<br>
Olivier Crépin-Leblond, PhD
<br>
ISOC UK England Chair
<br>
_______________________________________________
<br>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>