[chapter-delegates] next steps after the board meeting

[Gene Gaines]

Mike,

I do not follow your email to Philippe.

My reading of Philippe's email is that he is in basic
agreement with you.

Gene
gene.gaines at gainesgroup.com

On Tuesday, March 15, 2005, 3:05:55 AM, Mike wrote:

> Philippe,

> I guess you are destined to oppose my proposal that we spend our efforts to
> find a way to allow all humans who wish to support the Internet have a way
> to vote for the Internet Society Board of Directors.

> I believe the vote should NOT be subject to a "voter's tax" or any other
> artificial barrier to allowing full individual participation.  If you oppose
> that, then I must admit that I do not understand your position.

> Individuals, Chapters and all sorts of Organizations should have ways to get
> their views and concerns brought to the Internet Society and other bodies
> that have influence or control of the Internet.  It is all about building a
> World-wide network that is useful to us all.

> Mike Todd
> President, Mike Todd Associates - www.MikeTodd.com
> Supporting the Digital Coast

> President, Internet Society Los Angeles Chapter - www.ISOC-LA.org

> Center for Entrepreneurship and Technology Law
> Pepperdine University School of Law - mltodd at pepperdine.edu

> Technology Expert Witness - ExpertWitness at miketodd.com

>   310-321-5706  Office Phone
>   310-321-5701  Office FAX
>   714-893-6684  After Hours Voice
>   714-893-6866  After Hours FAX
>   714-222-3700  Cell


> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Philippe Le Roux" <leroux at vdl2.com>
> To: "Mike Todd" <miketodd at miketodd.com>
> Cc: <chapter-delegates at lists.isoc.org>; "James M Galvin"
> <galvin at elistx.com>; "Miguel Fiallos" <info at linguae.com>; "Jeffrey A.
> Sherman" <jeff at warever.com>; "James Butler" <james at musicforhumans.com>
> Sent: Monday, March 14, 2005 8:48 PM
> Subject: Re: [chapter-delegates] next steps after the board meeting




> To Mike and people from the BoT,

> Are you ready for putting 25% of all your anual income as membership ? It's
> what you're asking to millions of people around the world for being part of
> the "Internet for Everyone" !

> We did'nt talk about the technology but about the universality and the
> respect of Chapters as a democratic and eficient component of the ISOC
> organization that you want to bypass.

> If BoT and HQ want to manage globally without the Chapters, show you're
> capable :

> Suggest decent cotisation, begin to use at least 5 or 6 languages in each
> comunication, develop a way to debate and decide not based on taking a
> plane to tjhe US or being awake at your time !

> HQ shows it's an american burocracy trying to play the "good guy
> understanding" the poor people. Nobody needs this kind of help and
> arrogance.

> If you want to be global you must be humble,




> At 22:46 2005-03-14, Mike Todd wrote:
>>James Galvin, David McAuley and other Chapter Delegates,
>>
>>What we have experienced on this list over the past couple of weeks is a
>>massive misunderstanding and/or lack of effective marketing and/or - well,
>>you fill in  the blanks, chances are we have hit that wall too.
>>
>>As a past vice president for membership for the Internet Society I think I
>>have some knowledge of the history of ISOC Individual Membership.
>>
>>James is right when he states that ISOC has always been a membership
>>organization.  Whether it is the institutional members, individual members
>>or chapter members we talk about there has always been ISOC members.
>>
>>While I was VP Membership, I strongly advocated free individual membership
>>because of so many of the reasons that have been brought up on this list,
>>recently.  The only real stumbling block I was never able to obliterate was
>>the need to ensure that each individual member had the means to vote and
>>that there was a way to ensure that individual members could only vote
> once,
>>leading to a strong member identification system.  Since we live in an
>>electronic world, electronic means of making and verifying that
>>identification seems most reasonable.
>>
>>I have heard and understand all of the arguments about why this will not
>>work, why it is not logical, why technology is not a democracy, and on and
>>on...
>>
>>The basic issue is that "Internet is for everyone" dictates that we are a
>>system of citizens that all deserve a vote.  It implies a political system.
>>That is hard for us technologists to swallow and brings in issues we would
>>rather not address, nor have the responsibility to manage.  It is also
> tough
>>for us to imagine a way to base individual commitment without some kind of
>>financial commitment but this is one of the biggest barriers to the "global
>>democracy" of the Internet.
>>
>>If there was an easy solution, we would have done it years ago.  It is not
>>easy.
>>
>>If the ISOC Board or the ISOC Top Management had done a bit more in terms
> of
>>education and marketing before announcing the paid membership program, it
>>may have been accepted as the reinstatement of a way for Individual Members
>>to provide voluntary, monetary support to ISOC.  It did not have to be
>>called "Dues" or "Membership".  It did not have to be the only way for an
>>individual member to vote directly for Board members.  It did not have to
> be
>>presented in such a way that "Global Members" or "Chapter Members" would
>>feel that they were losing something.
>>
>>I have been an Individual Member of ISOC for a long time and will continue
>>to make that personal commitment.  I don't expect everyone in the World to
>>be able to, or to want to, make that kind of commitment.
>>
>>I have been a Chapter Member of ISOC for as long as the Los Angeles Chapter
>>has been in existence and will continue in that status as long as the Los
>>Angeles Chapter exists.
>>
>>I have not been a direct employee of any Institutional Member of ISOC but I
>>have provided consulting and other support to many of them and am pleased
>>that many of them have continued to support ISOC as Institutional Members.
>>
>>I am not a member of the IETF but I do try to support the development and
>>implementation of Internet Standards in every way I can, including taking
>>every opportunity to promote and protect the open and free development of
>>the Internet as the only true way to make it available to everyone in the
>>World.
>>
>>My own feelings are that we all have a lot more to agree about than to
> fight
>>about.  We also have many opportunities to reduce the perceptions of
>>barriers and to breech the artificial barriers that are blocking our
>>progress.  I guess this is a plea for positive criticism, positive actions,
>>and a sharing of positive feelings about the good we are all trying to
>>accomplish.
>>
>>Mike Todd
>>President, Mike Todd Associates - www.MikeTodd.com
>>Supporting the Digital Coast
>>
>>President, Internet Society Los Angeles Chapter - www.ISOC-LA.org
>>
>>Center for Entrepreneurship and Technology Law
>>Pepperdine University School of Law - mltodd at pepperdine.edu
>>
>>Technology Expert Witness - ExpertWitness at miketodd.com
>>
>>   310-321-5706  Office Phone
>>   310-321-5701  Office FAX
>>   714-893-6684  After Hours Voice
>>   714-893-6866  After Hours FAX
>>   714-222-3700  Cell
>>
>>
>>----- Original Message -----
>>From: "James M Galvin" <galvin at elistx.com>
>>To: <chapter-delegates at lists.isoc.org>
>>Sent: Monday, March 14, 2005 1:17 PM
>>Subject: [chapter-delegates] next steps after the board meeting
>>
>>
>>Dear Chapter Members,
>>
>>As you know, the ISOC Board met this past Friday and Saturday and they
>>discussed, in addition to other matters, the recent dissatisfaction that
>>a number of you have very strongly expressed regarding the new paid
>>individual membership level.  Historically, especially in recent years,
>>the Board has strongly held the position that there should be a paid
>>membership level and that this should be a vehicle through which
>>individual members could have a direct vote in ISOC Trustee elections.
>>
>>We summarized your criticism as the following:
>>
>>1. that a paid membership level was in direct conflict with the ethos
>>    that the "Internet is for everyone"
>>
>>2. that the payment level is a barrier to full opportunity around the
>>    world for people to participate
>>
>>3. that we failed to seek your input for this decision
>>
>>...
>>
>>Thank you, for your comments and your continued participation in ISOC.
>>
>>Jim Galvin
>>David McAuley

> *PLR!

> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> Philippe Le Roux
> Analyste Internet
> Associé
> V(DL)2 Inc.






--