[chapter-delegates] another appeal to stop haggling

[Alan Levin]

Hi,

On 20 Jun 2005, at 18:39, Vittorio Bertola wrote:
> I really don't want to take one side or the other of this discussion, 
> even if (and it's IMHO one of the main problems) most people that 
> participate in it seem to see things as a matter of "us and them".

This is a good point and I think Gene is trying to take a similar 
stance. Unfortunately there are two 'opposing' views and neither side 
seems to want to concede anything. I am hearing the same/similar 
questions asked again and again. This has been going on for too long, 
which has lead to the camps are becoming increasingly well defined. 
It's possibly an information society war (as opposed to discussion)!

Chapter side
I believe that our position is that things can't be much worse than 
they are for the chapters (short of law suits coming from ISOC-HQ). 
Hence a lot of jumping up and down, appeals, long emails, and many many 
challenges on the current system and outputs. These challenges posed by 
chapter representatives on the current system remain, and MUST be 
addressed or actioned. There is nothing that I am aware of that the 
chapters can concede to. The current system (structure, incumbents and 
process) is designed to keep chapter inputs weak.

HQ side
It appears that HQ consider the challenges as old and stale and we need 
to move forwards. The questions are coming from you and it appears that 
this is now escalated this to the highest levels... Good, so how can we 
move forwards?  Unfortunately ISOC-HQ (with support from their closest 
friends and IETF) is reacting defensively.

I am hoping that in order for us to all achieve more, it's time to make 
peace (which means more significant HQ concessions to chapter inputs 
even if you can't fully understand why). There are indications of some 
positive progress in this direction although nowhere near enough.

Since the ISOC BOT was structured prior to the establishment of the PIR 
and since the weight of the chapters in any discussion seems to be too 
little to be of any importance, it may be a good time to re look at the 
structure. I tried to make head or tail of it as it is now and it seems 
complicated. Please correct me if I am wrong.  There are 14 on the BOT, 
of which 3 are elected by global members represented by the chapter 
representatives. That leaves another 11 that I assume are elected by 
the other members. Is this possibly a reason why the chapters voice 
seems to be so weak?

hth,

Alan







---------------------------------------------
Alan Levin
Tel: +27 21 409-7997