[MemberPubPol] [chapter-delegates] FYI - in the coming discussion of the WGIG questionnaire

[Veni Markovski]

At 03:15 20-06-05  -0700, Fred Baker wrote:

>Which of the many emails that have been exchanged addresses this question? 
>Will you do so now?

Actually, Fred,
if you take a look at the minutes from our November 2004 meeting, you will 
find out that I have give you a proposal. ISOC didn't do enough to follow 
up on it.

I don't want to quote here all of it but you can take a look at 
http://www.isoc.org/isoc/general/trustees/mtg41.shtml

If ISOC has done its homework at the time people like me were pushing it to 
do so, our discussion today would have not been necessary. The 
responsibility for lack of actions from ISOC is not mine, but yours and 
Lynn's. I am the one who always said "What ISOC is doing in the public 
policy and with respect to chapters relations is not enough. We need to 
change that", and I was giving ideas and suggestions how to change it. You 
simply can't hold me responsile for lack of actions on behalf of ISOC. 
There's management that takes care of that, and that bears the 
responsibility. I am just a Board Trustee, I am no an executive. But trust 
me, regardless of the outcome of the elections for the new Board, I will 
continue to press on ISOC to start doing public policy the way chapters see 
it, the way the broader Internet community wants it. ISOC must not continue 
with its policy of being part of the landscape. We need to be part of the 
solution, and surely never part of the problem.


>>When we discuss such delicate matters, we must not forget, that the 
>>Internet didn't start with ISOC, and it will continue to exist long time 
>>after ISOC, because if ISOC doesn't change it might as well disappear 
>>with time.
>
>Can you make a statement that is a little more substantive, please?

Well,
How long will ISOC continue to exist if .org money stop coming? How long 
will ISOC continue to exist, if for one or another reason instead of $ 2 
from each domain name, ISOC has to get only $ 1 and thus lower twice the 
money it takes from PIR? ISOC bahaves as if it expects death in comfort 
environment. We need to change that. We need to have self-sustainable model 
for ISOC, not a model that relays on money, coming from the PIR. I have 
made several proposals on how to change that. Haven't heard anyone of the 
current "silencers" giving proposals, except that ISOC should fight to 
continue handling the .org during the re-bid in 2 years.

For the chapters, who are not familiar with the issue, the .org contract 
with ISOC was signed for a certain period of time, which ends in about 2 
years. It may be renewed, or the .org may be publicly offered in another 
bid process.

best,
veni