[chapter-delegates] ISOC BoT and membership

[Gene Gaines]

Wladek,

I apologize for taking so many words, below, to express my
personal thoughts.  The important words are in the first two
paragraphs and the last paragraph.

1) You have my permission to quote from any of my emails.

2) My own position is clear. I will not join the ISOC "member"
   category under the present newly-announced system.
   I cannot accept the "member" title when the annual fee is
   US$75 for everyone, everywhere. This is against what I
   believe ISOC should be.

   Every person should be able to join ISOC without having to
   pay more than a reasonable portion of their income.

   If ISOC Board believes that a charge for membership is
   necessary (that could be for a variety of reasons) then that
   fee should be based on the individual's ability to pay. For
   illustration, that fee could be the equivalent of pay for two
   hours of work, in their local currency.

   I do not presume to have the best design for an ISOC
   membership plan.  But I do know that the $75 membership
   plan announced on March 1, 2005, and the way that it was
   announced as a broadcast press release without any disclosure
   or consultation to its present members and chapters, is a
   serious step in the wrong direction for ISOC.

3) Briefly, my thoughts on ISOC and how it must operate in order
   to fulfill its very important -- critically important -- role
   in our world.

   It is my sense that much of the world that has dealt with
   ISOC Headquarters and Board of Trustees in the last few years
   believes that the organization is arrogant, centrist-driven,
   and does not want to hear from either chapters or individual
   members. Right or wrong, I believe that this to be a broad
   perception. This must be overturned. By deeds and words from
   Hq.

   To perform its stated missions, ISOC reasonably needs
   multiple levels of memberships. Possible examples:
   contributing, corporate, individual, region, chapter,
   student. That said, ISOC must be a membership organization,
   and to be effective every person who wants to be a member of
   ISOC, from every place in our world, should be able to have a
   voice at the governance table and must be heard.

   I appreciate that giving membership such a voice requires
   substantial resources and time and patience from those
   governing ISOC and its staff.  Cannot be avoided.

   Not a new problem. There are hundreds of "republic" and
   association models to learn from.

   I will not presume to propose a model, other than to say that
   it appears to me that individual members, chapters, corporate
   members, and possibly geographic areas or even governments
   will need a voice at the ISOC governance table and a vote in
   who will be their representative at that table.

   Most important to me. Individual or area income level must
   not be a barrier to anyone being able to say, proudly, that
   they are a member of ISOC and participate in its governance.
   "Member."  Not "second-class member", not "associate member".

Gene Gaines
gene.gaines at gainesgroup.com

On Wednesday, March 9, 2005, 5:09:48 AM, W. wrote:

> Dear all,

> Patrick vande Walle kindly volunteered to express my point of view as
> sketched in my presentation to Board of Trustees in Minneapolis. He wrote:
> "I share your fundamental concerns, with some nuances, so I think I
> would be able to make sure your opinion gets heard."

> Today I am going to enhance and improve my presentation. I would like to
> ask all of you for suggestions. Also I would like those of you who
> participate in our debate for right to use direct quotations especially
> from Irwan Effendi messages.

> Rgds

> Wladek



--