[chapter-delegates] New Membership Level
Carlos Vera
cvera at interactive.net.ec
Thu Mar 3 16:22:26 PST 2005
AND where from the votes come... AND if it was a survey it´s only that...
AND 2 years ago on Internet time is a decade ago...
"BTW for the sake of this discussion it would be useful to quote again how
the relevant questions were formulated two years ago and what was the
numeric result of that survey."
Carlos Vera Quintana
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jacek Gajewski" <gajewski at ceenet.org>
To: "James M Galvin" <galvin at elistx.com>
Cc: <chapter-delegates at lists.isoc.org>
Sent: Thursday, March 03, 2005 6:50 PM
Subject: Re: [chapter-delegates] New Membership Level
> Dear Jim,
>
> James M Galvin wrote:
>
>>
>> Nonetheless, I fully expect we will do the survey again some time soon.
>
> Can we then suspend the decision of introducing $75 membership and make
> sure that the new survey contains two explicit questions:
> 1. Are you for or against introducing $75/year membership fee with
> simultaneus change of the name of non-paying members to 'Associate
> members'?
> 2. Do you agree or disagree that the group of $75 paying members should
> have their own representatives in BoT?
>
> BTW for the sake of this discussion it would be useful to quote again how
> the relevant questions were formulated two years ago
> and what was the numeric result of that survey.
>
>> We are at a little bit of a disadvantage right now because we are only
>> now, 2 years later, able to offer the response to that first survey.
>
> Can you then be sure that the result of the first survey is still valid?
> Simply counting the voices in current discussion *strongly suggests*
> [with sufficient level of statistical confidence] that the majority of
> ISOC members do *not* want the new level of membership fee.
> In one of the previous mails you wrote that this new level is introduced
> because there is a 'group of people willing to pay $75.'
> Now you say, that new level is introduced because ISOC feels obliged to
> implement the results of a survey from two years ago.
> So, for the third time I kindly ask you to answer *frankly* a very simple
> question:
>
> _/*Why ISOC
> introduces the $75 membership?*/_
>
> Observing the current discussion, it is hard to believe that 'the group
> willing to pay $75' *currently* forms the majority of ISOC members,
> Ergo, it is not clear that by introducing the $75, ISOC HQ is fullfilling
> the wish of majority of its current members or only a richer minority
> willing to have their strong representation in BoT.
>
> May be it is good for all of us that this rich minority will have extra
> BoT places? If yes, please explain it, give some convincing arguments
> and then probably our discussion will be easier.
>
>>
>> Finally, a few people have called for ISOC to withdraw the new paying
>> membership level.
>
> Sorry Jim: Not few! nearly all who send their postings share this
> opinion.
> The voices in favour of '3 BoT seats for $75 Members' came only from
> representatives of ISOC HQ.
>
>> While I appreciate your passion, since that is what makes Chapters so
>> successful, and I understand your concern that Chapters will suffer if
>> members join ISOC instead of Chapters, let me just reassure you that
>> growing and supporting Chapters and the Associate Members that go with
>> them is a top priority of ISOC. Chapters are the means with which ISOC
>> members act locally in support of a global mission. We need and want the
>> free membership level so that Chapters can continue to do the job they
>> are doing without being burdened by an ISOC fee.
>
> And because 'supporting Associate Members is the top priority of ISOC'
> therefore ISOC calls them Associate [which sounds pejorative in many
> languages], changes the proportion of votes in BoT in their disfavour and
> contributes to divide in ISOC family downgrading the majority of ISOC
> members to lower caste.
>
> And we should still believe that 'Internet is for everyone'
>
> To sum up: I call ISOC to suspend the decision of introducing '3 BoT seats
> for $75 Members' system until a serious discussion of its consequences
> [there were even voices of a possible schism] and a new survey among the
> membership at large is done.
>
> Jacek Gajewski
> ISOC-PL
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
> manager: <http://lists.isoc.org/unsubscribe>
>
----------------------------------------------------------------
To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
manager: <http://lists.isoc.org/unsubscribe>
More information about the Chapter-delegates
mailing list