[Chapter-delegates] Privacy and the civil society Madrid Declaration

[Rudi Vansnick]

Dear Fred,

I do not fully agree. The fact the message was initially send out by 
Frederic without consultation of the "family", as you state, makes it 
for European chapter delegates quite difficult to have another opinion 
on what is present in the paper. Being confronted already a few times in 
Brussels, at EU level and Belgian level, by the fact global ISOC 
statements are to much "Americanised" makes the reflection of the 
readers and receivers of the message pessimistic of an eventual 
collaboration with an European chapter. This damages the work and time 
invested by European chapters a lot and makes future positive 
communication and collaboration quite difficult. As you are part of an 
international organisation, also dealing with bodies and large 
organisations in Europe you will probably well understand my point.

I hope in the near future this problem will be captured and handled by 
ISOC HQ with intervention of chapters representatives were it BoT or others.

Kind regards,

Rudi Vansnick
ISOC Belgium chair



Fred Baker schreef:
> Veni:
>
> A note to a public mailing list is not "confidential"; confidential 
> notes are sent to individuals. What Franck is talking about is the 
> very common etiquette point of asking someone before forwarding an 
> email on their behalf.
>
> In this case, your action has turned an internal discussion into an 
> external one. Marc asked some questions of chapter-delegates, which 
> the chapters and ISOC HQ need to have a conversation about. That is a 
> matter that is in the family, so to speak. Forwarding it to the folks 
> in Madrid makes it *also* a public relations problem, in which someone 
> who may or may not represent an ISOC consensus viewpoint now is seen 
> as representing an ISOC consensus viewpoint or undermining ISOC.
>
> Fred
>
> On Oct 30, 2009, at 4:02 AM, Veni Markovski wrote:
>
>> Franck,
>> I believe you have put the things in reverse order here.
>> a) The message from Frederic was not marked as "confidential", and b) 
>> it was asking questions, to which none of the chapters, which have 
>> signed the Madrid declaration, could respond, but only the people who 
>> initiated the declaration could.
>> I don't see this as "a cat out of the box", and I don't think that 
>> ONLY because of this ISOC should respond. If you think ISOC should 
>> respond only because of this, then I have to agree we have a 
>> disagreement with you.
>> I believe ISOC should be responding first to its members, chapters 
>> and organizational members, and only then to others.
>>
>> veni
>>
>> Franck Martin wrote:
>>> Veni,
>>>
>>> There is here a bit of breach of net-etiquette, by forwarding a 
>>> message for chapters to an external party. While the archives of 
>>> this list are public, I would have preferred the issue to be handled 
>>> internally first. Now that the cat is out of the box, silence from 
>>> ISOC is not too cool.
>>>
>>> Franck Martin
>>> http://www.avonsys.com/
>>> twitter: FranckMartin <http://twitter.com/FranckMartin>
>>>
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com 
> Version: 8.5.423 / Virus Database: 270.14.39/2468 - Release Date: 10/29/09 19:49:00
>
>