[chapter-delegates] New Membership Level

[Jacek Gajewski]

Dear Jim,

James M Galvin wrote:

>
> The fact is ISOC members want a paying membership.  We know this from 
> a survey we took more than 2 years ago.

If you count the postings from last few days, it seems that the 
majority  is against this kind of divide among the ISOC members. May be 
we should repeat this survey?




> We also surveyed Chapters (through this list) on what they wanted from 
> a membership system.
>
Please, let us clearly  differentiate two things. The GO software to 
handle a  Membership System (and the funding needed annually to maintain 
it operational),  and the divide, which will be created by introduction 
of $75  annual membership fee.



>
>
> Several people have commented that $75 is too much money.

Let me repeat the basic question: Why we introduce $75 fee? Because you 
feel obliged to do so from the results of a survey, which you mentioned 
above? Was the sum of $75 explicitely mentioned in this survey, so the  
people  knew what they are advocating for?




> But for those that want to contribute directly to ISOC, and there are 
> people for whom this is desired, we are offering an appropriate 
> membership level.
>
Or this new level is introduced because there is a class of people who 
want to donate money to ISOC?

It is great that there are people williing to contribute directly to 
ISOC; Let them do it and let HQ encourage them to do so. I suspect that 
most of them can afford also $125, which is the 'contributor' level, and 
if not you can create a special new level of $75-supporters.



> Instead, we will focus on a membership level that we can provide, with 
> benefits based on what members have requested.

Fine, if there is a group of members, who requested a special service 
and are ready to pay for it - please call it eg. 'premium (optional) 
package'....
In this case it will be clear, that you don't want to downgrade all 
others to the 'Associate' level [please also take into account that in 
many languages the associate has a negative meaning, of somebody who 
although agrees with the general idea but does not want to contribute to 
the realization of the organization goals ...].



>
>
> And finally, the fact that ISOC Members (as compared to ISOC Associate 
> Members) will get to vote directly for a Trustee is an easy target for 
> discussion.  Many people are very passionate about this point, on both 
> sides.
>
As it looks now, a small subset of Paying Members wants to have an 
additional  right to choose 'their' 3 BoT member.



> The new membership level was not created to support voting.  The fact 
> that voting is permitted is completely incidental.

If this is not what was meant, then why all members cannot vote for this 
extra 3 BoT places, but only paying members [under the restrictions, 
which you described] can?

With best regards,
Jacek Gajewski
ISOC-PL

----------------------------------------------------------------
To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
manager: <http://lists.isoc.org/unsubscribe>