[Chapter-delegates] Membership System

[W. Majewski]

Dear David,

> As has been mentioned, prior to purchasing the membership system ISOC 
> conducted extensive surveys and outreach among members and chapter
> delegates. 

 > The resulting ‘draft’ RFP took that feedback into
 > consideration and the consequent final RFP was again reviewed by
 > chapters and we received and considered their input in proceeding
 > thereafter.

Sorry but above statement are not accurate. It happend before you joined 
ISOC so I understand that you were given a brief without details.

No surveys were conducted. Chapters delegates were not consulted. No 
specification of requirements was published. Call for bids provided 
potential bidders two weeks to file detailed offer. Bidders were 
required to build an unspecified system over six months. Homebrew 
systems were excluded.

No info about bidders and offered prices was published. Contract was 
awarded to bidder with no experience on international market. 
Implementation of basic functionality lasted over two years.

Up to now no chapter declared on this list that existing system 
satisfies chapter's needs and helps it to perform membership management 
tasks. The most favorable opinion says "it does not harm to much".

> When we looked at web-based systems at the time (late 2003), not one of 
> them offered all of what we were seeking and not one of them was 
> international in scope (even though we received bids from a number of 
> different countries) – only GO appeared interested and capable of 
> becoming international.

What do you call "international"? Why they refused to allow for member's 
names with no-ASCII characters and scripts?

ISOC donated to them three years of free advertising plus  $60.000 in 
cash and they still were not willing to dedicate at least one full-time 
skilled programmer to implement ISOC-specific requirements?

In 2003 ISOC Polska suggested implementation and sustained development 
of our basic free-software based system. 30 months later it still has 
more functionality and flexibility than GO system despite beeing frozen 
over this period.

> We were aware that the system lacked functionality in some critical areas

And...?

> ... it should be recalled that we asked chapters 
> to float the RFP by their members and by possible vendors and we also 
> posted the RFP on our website.

When did it happen and how long it lasted? Two weeks?

> chapters efforts to disseminate to potential vendors. Despite this no 
> web based system fully measured up to the requirements in the RFP. Their 
> shortcomings were largely centered on:

> The system not being international enough: 
> a. No international character sets
> b. No currencies other than dollars
> c. Only available in English

What do you call "web based" system? Web frontend is a feature with no 
importance. What matters is a database structure and procedures.

> It bears repeating - the system does work and it is delivering value to 
> chapters and members. Fifteen chapters have been using it.

It bears repeating - the system never worked. Which chapters have been 
using it with good results?

> 2. The system is not international: 
> a. Cannot use international character sets
> b. Cannot accept currencies other than dollars
> c. Is only available in English

Oh, so how it differs from other options which were rejected due to 
shortcomings listed earlier?

List of basic shortcomings is much longer that you mention:
- no database interface for local repositories and front-ends
- no record of individual activity and membership history
- no support for local events and meetings
- no support for chapter's membership fees collected locally
- no support for local special interest groups and their projects
- no support for local newsletters
- no single-sign-on functionality for local or global content and services
- no support for local org members
- no triggers to remind members about renowal of their membership
... and much more.

Last but not least: http://members.isoc.org/PortalTools/Index.cfm does 
not satisfy W3C standards with its tables-based design.

> We have developed considerable experience with the GO system

They were tried and found wanting.

Rgds

Wladek