[chapter-delegates] Results of the board discussion on membership (redux)

[James M Galvin]

Irwan,


--On Tuesday, March 15, 2005 12:37 PM +0700 Irwan Effendi 
<hero_tsai at mainsyscon.net> wrote:

> 1. Chapters do not reject the program because of the money, but because
> the program will violate the rights of those who either:
> - can not afford to pay USD 75 per year
> - does not have a credit card
> - have a national credit card which can not be used in internet
> transaction

Although I do not speak for the Board, I think it is fair to say that 
they do understand all of the issues you mention.  In fact, all of these 
issues were motivating factors in creating the free membership level. 
ISOC had been desperately working through all of these issues for 10 
years when they decided to temporarily set aside paying membership, 
launch a free membership, and then invest resources in developing a new 
paying membership level.

The paying level of membership is intended to complement the free 
membership.  All members will be free members.  All members are eligible 
to join Chapters (57% have).  All members are eligible to be a paying 
member.

We recognize that the paying membership level will not appeal to all 
members, just as Chapters do not appeal to all members.  We accept that 
some people will want to be a paying member but will not be able to be 
one for various reasons, only one of which is the cost.  Similarly, we 
accept that some people will want to join a Chapter but will not be able 
to do so for various reasons, only one of which is because there is no 
Chapter of interest near them.

ISOC has several communities it is trying to serve.  Not all of them are 
appropriate for everyone but ideally at least one is appropriate for 
every person.

> 2. Chapters sincerely want to know which one is the genuine intention
> of the Board :
> - to enable all individual members to vote, yet currently does not have
> any better solutions on validation rather than credit card
> Or
> - to ensure that the Board and the Staff are not being ordered around by
> people who cannot afford to pay the costs of their requests, thus giving
> votes only to people who can afford it, and only from countries that has
> close financial and trade link with U.S. (their credit cards accepted in
> U.S.)

Membership was never about voting.  Not now, not then, and not tomorrow.

Regardless, all members can vote.  Free members vote in Chapters, paying 
members vote directly, organizational members vote directly, the IETF 
chooses its trustee through a mechanism of its own, etc.


> 3. Chapters want to know how the new system will handle massive vote
> purchase, which can easily be done if any one of the organization member
> feels the need to hold one more trustee chair. This is very likely to
> happens and will have serious impact on the trusworthiness of the Board
> in the eye of Chapters

Could you please say more about this vulnerability.  Any single 
organizational member simply does not have any more influence over the 
overall result than any other member who chooses to vote.

Organizational members have one Trustee they can elect each year. 
Chapters have one Trustee they can elect each year.  Individuals have one 
Trustee they can elect each year.  These three trustees are not the same 
person.

For an organizational member to have such influence as you suggest, they 
would need to appeal to other organizational members, a majority of 
individual members (numbered in the 100s), and a majority of Chapters.

Do believe that Chapters are vulnerable to such coercion?


> 4. Chapters want to know why it was necessary to downgrade their status
> from global member to associate member, while even in the minutes of
> the meeting of the BOT, there is no such recommendation. The
> recommendation, as it states, is to develop a new professional level
> membership, not to downgrade existing one. So far Staff has only submit
> apologies regarding this, yet no explanation about why there was such
> necessity.

There is nothing to explain because truly, there was no intent to 
downgrade any membership.  Nothing changed except to introduce a 
different kind of membership and incidental to that we simply selected a 
name.

As we have already noted, we will certainly change the name to something 
more agreeable.  And we very much apologize for any confusion or 
perception of downgrading.

To what do you suggest we change the names (free and paying)?


> 5. Chapters requests that HQ will open its accounting book. It is a
> widely known fact that ISOC has utilized the existence of chapters and
> support from chapters when bidding for the public internet registry
> from ICANN. Chapters feels that by the virtue of cause and effect,
> chapters are entitled to know how much money are coming in and how much
> are being used and for what purpose. As to the management of this
> money, of course, Board has the right as stated in the bylaws. Chapters
> only wants to see the report.

David has already replied to this.  ISOC's accounting book (at a gross 
level) has always been available on the web site.


> 6. In your previous statement and I quote:
> "Certainly we all want the
> Individual and Chapter Programs to be a "good thing" for as many people
> as possible, but they also have to be a "good thing" for all of ISOC.
> ISOC is more than the sum of its Chapters and Individual members"
>
> ISOC consists of:
> Board
> Staff
> Organization members
> Chapters
> Individual members
>
> Since Staff works based on Board instruction, and Board is actually
> part of either Organization members or Chapters, the above statement
> will translate as follows:
>
> Certainly..... but they have to be a "good thing" for Organization
> members, too.
>
> There were several emails on this list assuming similar to the above.
> Chapters want to know whether the translated statement is the truth.

No, the translated statement is false.  For one thing, ISOC serves more 
than its members, it serves the Internet community-at-large.  It does 
this through its policy activities and its subsidiary in the registry 
business, Public Internet Registry (PIR).  ISOC also partners with IETF 
to support the Internet standards process.


> 7. Chapters believe that HQ has not been following its own commitments.
> The openness of the standards, transparency, especially the "internet
> for everyone" part. Chapters want to know whether HQ still willing to
> work side by side with them or does HQ has its own agenda which HQ does
> not want chapters to be aware of. As this is the summarizing point,
> this is the BIG QUESTION and honesty and sincerity is absolutely
> required to helps clear out misunderstandings.

There is no hidden agenda.  All of the ISOC staff have been honest and 
forthcoming.

The expansion of Chapters and free members has always been a priority 
goal, and will continue to be.  Yes, ISOC is now offering a paying level 
of membership (the details of which we are now considering with your 
help)  but that was always because it is an important part of ISOC.  It 
is intended to be complementary to the Chapter and free membership 
programs.


> The suggestion part:
>
> As I have sent this previously, maybe HQ has missed it.

I did see your earlier message and I apologize for not responding sooner. 
The categories of membership you propose are very interesting.  I have 
not considered them carefully but they do look reasonable to implement.

However, one characteristic of individual membership that we want is for 
the entire process to be automated.  Your Verified, Profiled, and Pioneer 
members suggest there is probably some staff resources required to manage 
it.  At the very least, an investment in developing the applications and 
services to support them automatically would be required.  Also, keep in 
mind that while most Chapters have tens of members (some a few hundred), 
ISOC needs the system to work with thousands of members.

So, I can not say right now if your membership levels are appropriate for 
ISOC.  We need time to consider them in detail, and consider how they 
could be implemented with ISOC's infrastructure.

And that infrastructure includes all Chapters.  My initial reaction is to 
use the Chapters for identifying some of the categories of members, but 
that would require all Chapters to agree to such categories.  And, 
unfortunately, it is worse than that, because there is certain to be at 
least one Chapter that will not do its duty.  So, we need to consider how 
to deal with that situation, too.

I am very interested in comments from other Chapters about your 
membership program?

Jim Galvin
VP Chapters



> I am
> resubmitting idea about membership verification from Indonesia, and
> this will be point by point to, and I wish that Board or Staff can
> answer point by point, which one can be done and which one cannot be
> done. And if a point cannot be done, please also explains why.
> For the background information, this is not a new build-it-from-scratch
> system. In Indonesia, I also reside as officer of public bureau for an
> association of alternative healing foundation, which currently has 12
> organizations and over 78.000 members in 16 islands in Indonesia, and
> this was the system I develop for that association, which I adjusted for
> Indonesian chapter, changing snail mail with e-mail and application
> letter with online application form. For this discussion purpose, I
> already adjusted the system to suit HQ.
>
> 1. Registered Members
> Anyone who has email and register their email and their name at our
> system (HQ already do this)
> Registered Members received newsletters, participate in local
> discussion, etc, but can not vote.
>
> 2. Verified Members
> Any registered members who has either attended a physical meeting or
> sent in a copy or scan of their valid ID card. Verified members
> received member card and may vote on local elections
>
> 3. Profiled Members
> Any verified member that has sent in a picture of them wearing their
> member card (this way, there is no old pictures in record, fake I.D.
> etc) Another requirement is to send in a short biodata (date of birth,
> last education, etc...).
> Profiled member MAY and MUST vote on general elections. This is done so
> that the number of voters participating in any elections will be high.
> If Profiled Member does not vote on 2 subsequent election, their
> membership status degrades until they re-verify their commitment.
>
>
> 4. Donating Member.
> Any registered member who donate money to the cause. Donating members
> receive recognition and receive souvenir(s) and discounts depending on
> the amount donated.
>
> 5. Pioneer Members
> Any members who has been known to actively involved in furthering the
> cause of organization in the past. Pioneer Members are also Profiled
> Members, with no possibility of being degraded.
>
> ---
> We currently have professional certification programs, online study
> materials, etc. We also hold seminars and workshops frequently, and
> plan to assist in job placement, R&D efforts, etc. These things are not
> free, and available to the public in the above class at the same price.
> We realize though, that there are people who would like to be our
> regular, and for that we created the 6 th member class:
>
> 6. Subscription Member
> Any Profiled Member who has paid subscription fee. Subscription Member
> is entitled to discounts, free entries, magazines and so on, depending
> on the current list of benefits.
>
>
> All member levels may inspect the books (financial report) of the
> chapter, and submit ideas for further developments and enhancements
>
>
> Herein closed my email.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Irwan Effendi