[Chapter-delegates] ISOC Elections result

Mon May 12 21:26:09 PDT 2008

Mirror, mirror on the wall... Has it ever occurred to you that the tone of
the discussion might keep a large number of people out of it and,
consequently, they might want to participate in a more pragmatic manner
elsewhere?

N.B. I've resigned from the board of ISOC Finland and thus represent now in
this environment only myself (and will soon drop off from this list).  

Erkki I. Kolehmainen
Tilkankatu 12 A 3, FI-00300 Helsinki, Finland
Puh. (09) 4368 2643, 0400 825 943; Tel. +358 9 4368 2643, +358 400 825 943

-----Alkuperäinen viesti-----
Lähettäjä: chapter-delegates-bounces+eik=iki.fi at elists.isoc.org
[mailto:chapter-delegates-bounces+eik=iki.fi at elists.isoc.org] Puolesta
Hakikur Rahman
Lähetetty: 13. toukokuuta 2008 5:05
Vastaanottaja: Veni Markovski; chapter-delegates at elists.isoc.org
Aihe: Re: [Chapter-delegates] ISOC Elections result

I agree with Veni. With my small experience over the years what I 
have found, despite individual chapter's visible (locally) 
activities, due to the inclusiveness and attention (from central, and 
this need a longer thread of discussion) such a large organization 
like ISOC is missing the exact threshold. This is my personal opinion 
and I will be pleased to talk about it. However, I see abrupt blogs 
or thread of discussions while it is a special commitment, otherwise 
this list remains silent.

This could be natural, but, with so many active local chapters and so 
many active members, we should have achieved more a long before!

Kind regards,
Hakik

At 08:47 AM 5/13/2008, Veni Markovski wrote:
>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
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Chapter-delegates mailing list Chapter-delegates at elists.isoc.org
>http://elists.isoc.org/mailman/listinfo/chapter-delegates

_______________________________________________
Chapter-delegates mailing list
Chapter-delegates at elists.isoc.org
http://elists.isoc.org/mailman/listinfo/chapter-delegates