[chapter-delegates] A different - new - membership ISOC

[Alan Levin]

On 2 Mar 2005, at 12:18, Veni Markovski (Trustee) wrote:
> I think Jim responded already - his comments are with more substance, 
> right?

I don't think that chapters are impressed at all.... Where's the 
consultation? I strongly advise that the board and staff do some 
rethinking on this and seriously consider running a new internally 
focused membership poll....(I suggested a few ideas on a previous post 
in addition to those mentioned today).

On 1 Mar 2005, at 20:13, EJ Preston (TEXAS) wrote:
> Agreed!  We at SalsaNet (Texas ISOC) are not tapping our already 
> strapped membership (that internet should be free, "is for everyone" 
> thing) to solve any funding problems that may exist.  We pursue major 
> donors and sponsors, portraying ourselves as making a REAL difference 
> in the community.  I'm sure most all chapters can claim/do the same.

I think this comment really sums it up nicely.... REAL difference also 
includes many of the rights that seem to be restricted for 'associate 
members'

but I think an interesting comment came from:

On 1 Mar 2005, at 16:16, Eduardo Diaz (Peurto Rico) wrote:
> What happened to the money that is being generated by the .ORG? Can we 
> use
> some of it to support ISOCs programs and activities?

good point.... apparently we're going to see some opportunity to get 
access to some of this.
Well it's a point that seems to have been much discussed, but.....

Begin forwarded message:
> From: David McAuley <mcauley at isoc.org> (STAFF)
> Date: 23 February 2005 21:58:43 GMT+02:00
> We are putting together an updated SOP draft to present to the Board 
> of Trustees. It is in draft form. In the next few days it will be far 
> enough along as to be presentable as a draft to this list as we 
> solicit feedback, comments, suggestions. So this note is in the nature 
> of a ‘Look for this Mail’ announcement. We expect to have it out in 
> the next several days.

David, maybe you can update us on this point?

My speculative view of this is that - once again - we as chapters are 
being undermined at the global level, and even if we do get access to 
some funds, it appears to be just another token to 'keep us satisfied' 
(especially considering the membership system, poll questions, 
translations and other issues we've all agreed on this list but don't 
seem to be acted upon by the staff. please don't misinterpret this as 
not appreciative for the fact that this is all public now, and thanks 
Gene for arranging the blog/google publishing :)

I personally feel that we - the chapters - are the *main* 
representatives global internet community and society (the AT-Large 
process seems to support this concept). The ICANN decision to give .org 
to ISOC was stated as to be due to ISOC (our) proximity to the global 
Internet community. yet the way that the funds and organisation is 
governed appears to be dictated to the chapters.

Am I misunderstanding or is something not very wrong?

Are we possibly heading to a time where a new body or structure, where 
there is a greater level of support and commitment to the chapters?  (I 
almost wrote non-US but the comments from Texas and Washington have 
been most useful)

I hope this helps stimulate new thinking.

... Cape Town calling London (and france and sweden and other 
europeans).... I know how influential your chapters (and members) are, 
and you seemed to like the .net idea that was quickly squashed, what's 
your thoughts on the membership issue?

Alan



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


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