[chapter-delegates] How we can improve the chapter <-> BoT relations

[Carlos Vera Q]

Veni, you must have a very concrete process

See here:

"1. From now on, whenever there's a board decision or management decision, 
that includes some document (e.g. Strategic Plan, new membership model, 
etc.) that may be discussed, this should be published either to the full 
chapter-delegates list, or to a smaller one, where only interested parties 
should subscribe (I'd prefer the latter)."

Internet allows every member to vote on every decision and this should take 
the same time for a board or an Assembly of members. More deeply,there is no 
reason to have a Board. Representation on electronic age have changed we do 
not need representative which are elected to make decisions fast and in 
short time, and this can be acomplished by a general assembly on Internet no 
matter what issue and how urgent it is. Rethink representation the whole 
way.

There is no reason political or technical to make smaller lists of 
"interested parties"

Simply every issue is posted in a forum, take a short or long discussion, 
votation and decision based on this voting is made. SIMPLE!!

2. "Give the chapters 1 week for discussion, after which all comments should 
be reviewed, taken into consideration. Should they not be used, ISOC staff
must provide reason why."

"Taken into consideration" can be as simple as say "this is not an option" 
arrogant and simple statement from some divine chief.

Again, every you simply have the issue complete on Internet, have a 
discussion and votation. Every member can participate. No Board is needed.

3. "After document is published, no further discussion should take place, 
unless there's a big error or mistake, which has been discovered after the 
one week period."

Again so subjective... Who decide what a big error or mistake is? Simply 
again members. Discuss and vote.

"This may be not a good process..." You are right

This is Internet Age. Let's use what we have here. Let's think e-democracy


Carlos Vera Quintana

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Veni Markovski" <veni at veni.com>
To: <chapter-delegates at lists.isoc.org>
Cc: "Lynn St.Amour" <st.amour at isoc.org>; "Fred Baker" <fred at cisco.com>
Sent: Wednesday, March 16, 2005 12:49 AM
Subject: [chapter-delegates] How we can improve the chapter <-> BoT 
relations


> Dear colleagues,
>
> here's my proposal:
>
> 1. From now on, whenever there's a board decision or management decision, 
> that includes some document (e.g. Strategic Plan, new membership model, 
> etc.) that may be discussed, this should be published either to the full 
> chapter-delegates list, or to a smaller one, where only interested parties 
> should subscribe (I'd prefer the latter).
>
> 2. Give the chapters 1 week for discussion, after which all comments 
> should be reviewed, taken into consideration. Should they not be used, 
> ISOC staff must provide reason why.
>
> 3. After document is published, no further discussion should take place, 
> unless there's a big error or mistake, which has been discovered after the 
> one week period.
>
> This may be not a good process, but at least gives some ideas of how a 
> normal organization should be working.
>
> I'd urge even more - to have such processes built for every act and action 
> of ISOC.
>
> Then the Board will be in far better position, as today many of the 
> chapter delegates believe that if they tell a Board Trustee something, 
> then it will be reviewed and accepted by the BoT as a decision. We need to 
> have a process for such requests, too. While I don't have anything against 
> to bring a message from chapters to the Board, if we want this message to 
> make a difference, there should be a process for handling such messages.
>
> I think another process that we may wish to develop is how to form working 
> committees of chapter representatives (may be the delegates?), that will 
> work on the three pillars. I am sure that many good ideas from countries 
> worldwide could be used, esp. in the WSIS and the UN environment.
>
> What do you think?
>
>
> At 18:56 15-03-05  -0500, James M Galvin wrote:
>>Thank you Mike, well said.
>>
>>Jim
>>
>>
>>
>>--On Monday, March 14, 2005 7:46 PM -0800 Mike Todd 
>><miketodd at miketodd.com> 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.
>
>
>
>
>