[Chapter-delegates] ISOC Elections result

[Veni Markovski]

At 10:55 AM 5/13/2008  +1200, Franck Martin wrote:
>Eduardo, Veni, et al.
>
>I think the comment is slightly unfair.

Only if you have considered them as pointing at you :)
which, I guess you did :)

Didn't want you, Alejandro ot Patrick feel that way. I have tried - 
in quite a number of attempts - to move things internally at ISOC, 
and at the end I gave up. We are doing a lot of things at 
ISOC-Bulgaria, ISOC.nl, ISOC.pl, and others are working hard, too. 
Many chapters do what they can, but the general feeling I see is that 
something is missing in the picture. For me that is the understanding 
that the chapters are the most vital, most user-oriented parts of 
ISOC. They are the blood of ISOC. ISOC could not function without 
them, and they have served ISOC well for obtaining the .org bid some 
time ago. They didn't do it because they wanted something in return, 
except attention and inclusiveness.

Your achievements, which you've documented - not fully - in your mail 
are true, and correct. What perhaps is missing is that it should not 
be your job to alert us about the board meetings, but this should be 
a procedure, more or less automati, and performed by someone at ISOC 
HQ, not by a trustee.

But there's one thing which is fundamental at every organization that 
has a board in the USA:

>Understand, it does not matter if there is 1, 3 or 6 chapters elect 
>at the board, the other board members are not the enemy. They just 
>need to know the chapters better while at the same time understand 
>that chapters are not a dead weight to carry around. If chapters are 
>visible to the board by participation, then they will shape things.

The number always is important. That's why it is important not only 
who sits on the board (all current Trustees are fine people), but how 
many represent the different groups. That's a different discussion 
from whether the Trustees are good. They are, no doubt about it. But 
at the same time they represent certain parts of ISOC, which have 
different interests. One is more interested in the standards and the 
techincal issues, the other - in the public policy (note: again, it 
is not about the current Trustees, but about the general principle). 
You say that  chapters should be visible to the Board by 
participation... but then, how are the organizational members visible 
to the Board? Do they participate and thus become visible?  You could 
even turn the question upside down, and ask - if the Board wants to 
be visible to the chapters, it should participate and start shape 
things. You may wish to spend some time and find out how many of the 
Trustees actually participate in chapters, and how many are writing 
to this list. This could be useful to see why there's some problem in 
the communications. It is not because of you, or any other Board 
Trustee today.

I know why some of the chapters don't respond to surveys, and don't 
propose ideas: they've been there, they've done that. It didn't help. 
Why waste resources again?


>The sphere project is a result of the board effort, (including non 
>chapter-elect board members) to get better interaction between 
>chapters and ISOC HQ. Groups have been formed, and are starting to 
>work, but if you look closely, it is more like 5 people from staff 
>or board and 2 people from chapters. I have already heard complains 
>about chapters not talking. Very difficult to know what chapters 
>want when there is no-one to talk to.

I could start talking on that topic, but it requires a different thread.

best,
Veni