[Chapter-delegates] By-laws discussion during the Global INET

[cveraq at gmail.com]

Can somebody please remember in the list where and at what time the meeting will be?

Thank you

Carlos
-----Original Message-----
From: Veni Markovski <veni at veni.com>
Sender: chapter-delegates-bounces at elists.isoc.org
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2012 04:58:23 
To: Klaus Birkenbihl<Klaus.Birkenbihl at Isoc.de>
Cc: <chapter-delegates at elists.isoc.org>
Subject: Re: [Chapter-delegates] By-laws discussion during the Global INET

I am not sure I can join today at 12:15, as I am at another meeting, 
which may not have ended by then, but here are some comments, and hope 
they will contribute to the discussion. They are only for the chapters' 
section, I count on John, Klaus and others, who have sent their comments 
on the rest of the document.

General observation and notes: ISOC by-laws cannot require from chapters 
to do things, or to participate in things, which might be illegal in 
certain jurisdictions, or even if not illegal, might be delicate for 
implementation. The way the by-laws are written now, they are (again) 
somewhat more US-centric than internationally oriented.

v.



On 4/24/2012 02:48, Klaus Birkenbihl wrote:
> Not sure if I can make it here my 2pence for the discussion.
> we learned:
>    - ISOC is cause based
>    - funny enough according to some US legislation this can be used
>      as a reason to deny influence and control to the membership
> So the message we hear is (this applies to all earlier ISOC bylaws
> as well): we are allowed to do it this way therefore we do it this
> way.
> So ISOC took the easy way to bridge the gap between a - at least
> conceptually - huge membership and limiting the power and control
> to mostly a "knowledgeable" inner circle. This makes it easier
> to provide continuity and stability, but can also be the source
> of nepotism and cliquism.
> But what it doesn't reflect is the spirit of the Internet: openness,
> transparency and participation. Even the discussion that was set-up
> lacks this openness by separating the org members discussion from
> the personal members discussion. Divide et impera?
> Without getting to much in details: I would appreciate if ISOC
> would become an organization that does a better job in balancing
> pretension and reality. Wrt the bylaws this means that we should
> do a better shop in balancing competence, commitment and
> influence. This would much better serve our cause than using
> the cause as an excuse to continue to run a mostly closed shop.
>
> Best, Klaus