[chapter-delegates] next steps after the board meeting

[James M Galvin]

--On Tuesday, March 15, 2005 4:06 PM +1200 Franck Martin 
<franck at sopac.org> wrote:

> I think Mike summarise well the situation.
>
> The objective is one member = one vote

Mike, please correct me if I am wrong, but I do not believe he said that 
at all.

Even if he did, that requirement is not met today even without the new 
paying membership.  Keep in mind that all members may join as many 
chapters as they wish.  Thus, individuals may vote multiple times, once 
in each Chapter.

Also, while we are examining ISOC's process, we should equally examine 
Chapter processes.

Consider that there are Chapters that do not vote.  There are Chapter 
members that are disenfranchised because their officers do not follow 
through on their duty.  How would you suggest we address that?

Consider that there are Chapters that do not vote according to the 
preferences of their members.  Voting delegates decide for themselves how 
the Chapter is going to vote and that is what they do.  How do you 
suggest we address that?

ISOC's voting process is not perfect.  It is controlled and it is 
reasonable, but it is not perfect.  Having an objective of one vote per 
one member is admirable but would require a very different type of 
organization than ISOC is at this time.

How would you propose we achieve such an objective within the framework 
that is ISOC today?  Keep in mind that if you propose we should change 
ISOC that is a very different discussion than the one we are having now.


> The financial support of ISOC via individual membership contribution is
> something else... I would have like to see ISOC requesting chapters to
> push their member to contribtue and report back to chapters who was
> paying what (a kind of merit system).

ISOC used to do this, and I am sad to report the Chapters failed 
miserably.  Oh there were some (perhaps most) who were honest, kept ISOC 
informed about members, remitted money to ISOC when appropriate, but the 
few Chapters who were not have made such a system unworkable.

For such a system to be workable and fair to all Chapters, ISOC would 
need a way to ensure that Chapters follow through on their duty.  I 
really, really do not want to be responsible for checking up on Chapters 
in this way but somebody will have to do it.

How do you suggest we address that?


> I think, James said it, "if you don't like it you can go" when I was
> asking him the value proposition of ISOC to chapters and members. So
> Pacific Islands members are just doing that.

I did not mean to say that.  What I was trying to say is that the value 
proposition is a two-way street.  ISOC provides the infrastructure and 
services to support members and Chapters, and at the same time those 
members and Chapters partner with ISOC to achieve its mission and purpose.

Since membership is free, it is a one-sided decision on the part of the 
member.  If you want to work with ISOC we are ready willing and able to 
support you.  We certainly want you to join or remain a member, as the 
case may be.

Jim Galvin
VP Chapters