[Chapter-delegates] An invitation to the Webinar re. LoA/Dashboard and New Tools available

[Anne Lord]

Hi Norbert, All,

Thank you for your email gathering the feedback made on this list.    
This is very helpful and it is important, so I thank everyone who has  
to date, provided feedback.

Let me step back a second and explain some more about the webinars.     
They are an outreach effort designed to bring Chapter officers up to  
speed on how we got here, to explain what the chapter affiliation and  
support programme is, what the components of it are (supporting  
dashboards, guide), and to offer an opportunity for review and  
feedback from as many Chapter officers as possible.

This is actually very important. We are putting a substantial effort  
towards ensuring that we are being as inclusive as we can by trying to  
hear from as many Chapter leaders as possible.  We are providing the  
webinars on a regional basis, offering different timeslots. If people  
are unable to make any of the offered timeslots we are asking them to  
get in touch with us.  This process will continue until we have  
reached representatives of the majority of Chapters.  It does not  
replace written feedback or formal review.  I personally would not be  
comfortable changing this path until we have had the opportunity to  
speak with more Chapter representatives. We are hoping to finish this  
by the end of April.

  If you have specific suggestions for improvements in the form of  
text, alternative wording etc, we will happily receive it for  
consideration. To that end, we have already received some suggestions  
(thank you!).  After we have collated the feedback, it will be  
reviewed in the context of expression across the entire community of  
Chapter officers, and will incorporate changes where we can before  
putting the document out (in whatever form) for a final review and  
translation from the Chapter community.

The points about membership and bylaws made by Christian, Veni and  
Christopher are noted as part of the feedback and are being considered  
as part of the bylaws review. However I am not going to try to provide  
answers here or second guess the work of the bylaws committee. I do  
understand that the committee will make available the results of its  
deliberations to the members in draft format for comment soon.    
Notwithstanding, we are continuing with the webinars, in order ensure  
that everyone has equal opportunity to be heard.

I encourage anyone who has not yet joined a webinar, to join one as  
soon as they receive an invitation. Norbert,  I hope you can join one  
of the three webinar slots to which you were recently invited.  We are  
trying to roll these out as extensively as we can.  To all those that  
have provided feedback - thank you for your ongoing help!

Best wishes

Anne
--

On 06/03/2012, at 11:03 PM, nhklein wrote:

> Hi Everybody,
>
> after having been cut off technically since yesterday for one day  
> (local problems), I am responding to some mails which came in in the  
> meantime – as my final contribution to the list before the webinar  
> in about 3 hours. Of course the webinar will be an opportunity to  
> talk things over – but, as has been said in so many postings on the  
> Chapter-Delegates list, there are quite a number of fundamental  
> issues which need clarification of a nature more serious than can be  
> dealt with in a series of different webinars, where there will be  
> different participants every time.
>
> As the mail from Christian de Larrinaga – down here – says, there  
> are problems which need to be clarified with all concerned, before  
> it is possible to respond to some details:
>
> = = =
> I am clear that before the local board can seriously engage with  
> this issue it would be important to know how ISOC views the status  
> of its own members.
>
> What is an ISOC global member?
>
> - in relation to a chapter that member signed up for through the  
> ISOC site
> - in relation to ISOC (voting rights etc)
> - in relation to chapter members who signed up directly at the local  
> internet society organisation service.
> = = =
> Some clarity over the intended status of members of ISOC is  
> absolutely crucial to how chapters need to respond. I think this is  
> a matter for the Trustees and if Staff are engaged...
> = = =
>
> I appreciate also that Anne Lord joined now the debate, helping us  
> all to understand some of the pre-history of where we find ourselves  
> now all of sudden.
>
> But I say consciously “all of a sudden” because this history had  
> been broken off a long time ago - and as Christopher Wilkinson  
> reminded us recently, there had been quite some efforts not to let  
> this history break:
>
> = = =
> 1. When the staff receive substantive input from Chapters and  
> members (e.g. the London November 2010 Chapter workshop), then an  
> alternative proposal should be sent for consultation within three or  
> four weeks. The LoA episode, with more than a year's silence from  
> the staff, is not acceptable.
>
> 2. Most of your interlocutors are elected delegates from their  
> Chapters or other entities (e.g. ISOC-ECC). Accordingly this is  
> really inappropriate:
>
> > requested not to forward it further until we have heard and  
> incorporated your feedback.
>
> Whether delegates consult their authorities or their members is  
> their decision. Not a question for the staff.
>
> 3. When the staff state that an issue has been <<approved by ISOC>>,  
> this should be associated, in advance, with a schedule for the  
> relevant decision by the Board of Trustees, with opportunity for  
> Chapters and members to provide timely input. Clearly, on matters of  
> institutional and political significance, a simple e-mail from a  
> staff member does not constitute "approval" by ISOC.
> = = =
>
> I did not see that Christopher and ISOC-ECC got any response on this  
> list.
>
> And I do not list up here the various efforts I made on this list to  
> get responses.
>
>
> Thanks, Anne, for sharing information on the following plans:
>
> > The webinars are being rolled out twice a week for as long as it  
> takes.  There is no "rush", and I apologise if it seems this way.   
> If you cant make this weeks webinar, we will invite you to another.
>
> Until now, I had not been aware at all that you intend these  
> webinars with varying participants to continue twice a week into  
> some future. I really had the impression that there was a rush, with  
> a quick sequence of changes between two-slot and three-slot and two- 
> slot Doodle options, just for this one week.
>
> Regardless of process, with such enormous diversity across the  
> Chapters and particular situations, I fully anticipate that there  
> will be a small number who will not be entirely in agreement with  
> the details. What we are seeking is a balance across the diversity  
> of opinions, noting that it will be impossible to satisfy everyone.
>
> This makes me again state that I obviously misunderstood the  
> intention of having a LoA officially rolled out which would include  
> provisions to discontinue the status of a Chapter as affiliated   
> (without an appeal process). If this is really the intention, we  
> would need a text which goes beyond providing a balance of diverse  
> opinions, but something we can trust in situations of crisis and  
> conflict.
>
> As Prof. ANG Peng Hwa's comment also shows, he – like myself and  
> many others – did not understand some important goals in the way  
> they showed up on the Chapter list:
>
> >> I appreciate that you have a rather heavy email traffic volume  
> but a paragraph or two in explanatory text, even in seemingly  
> redundant communication (we need redundant communication to  
> communicate) will be helpful. And, as in this case, could eventually  
> save you more work.
>
>
> And as John Moore remarked:
>
>
> >> I think the Affiliation Agreement is an extremely important  
> document.  It goals are laudable -- to strengthen the Internet  
> Society and the Chapters by creating accountability. However, I  
> don't think that Chapters have been brought into the process (at  
> least from what I have been able to see). Further, as I remember the  
> Bylaws of the Society needed revisions to go along with the  
> Affiliation Agreement.  It does not appear that these revisions have  
> been made.
> >>
> >> I had provided comments on an earlier version of the Affiliation  
> Agreement about a year ago.  Then I heard nothing more  In a quick  
> review of this document I find that it still contains major flaws. I  
> do not see how Chapters can be asked to sign on without having had a  
> chance for the Chapter governing bodies to have some input.
> >>
> >> I will make only a couple of major points, some of which I made  
> before.
> >>
> >> There is no mechanism for resolving a dispute...
>
> >> As it stands, I would have to recommend to our Chapter's  
> governing board that it not sign the Agreement as written.
>
> I collected these random point to explain again why I had written
>
> >> I have now signed in to be available at one of the two Doodle  
> time slots – but I did so with some reluctance.
>
> I had elaborated on the reasons with specific points, some of which  
> do not fit into a series of webinars where twice a week for quit  
> some time different people will raise some points – while we do not  
> have a common platform to clarify the basis on which we supposedly  
> stand together.
>
>
> Norbert
> ISOC Cambodia Chapter
> _______________________________________________
> Chapter-delegates mailing list
> Chapter-delegates at elists.isoc.org
> https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/listinfo/chapter-delegates

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Anne Lord,                                 <lord at isoc.org>
Director of Chapters               http://www.isoc.org
Internet Society     "The Internet is for everyone"
---------------------------------------------------------------------