[Chapter-delegates] Let's make sure everything moves us forward

[Veni Markovski]

Dave, and all,
I think you are touching here on several key points, which are addressed 
in different ways. But let me see it from the point of view of a 
non-West chapter (though I am almost sure that chapters from the West 
might share this experience). See comments below.

On 10/14/13 13:19, Dave Burstein wrote:
> Vint, Bob, Dave, Narelle
>
>    I hope some of those who built ISOC will take a strong role now 
> holding us together while moving forward.
>
> I've cc'd this to you because there's an emerging divide within ISOC 
> between the staff and the chapters, brought to the fore by the move 
> today to from an assertive chapter group.

There has always been division between ISOC HQ and the chapters. Note 
that it's not between the staff and the chapters. The staff are 
wonderful people, each and every one of them, and many of them are 
working with the chapters, when they can. The problem is, sometimes the 
HQ doesn't work with the chapters, because the chapter policy (and that 
goes back to the time I was on the Board (2002-2007)) sometimes is 
considered by the HQ as not appropriate, or in the case when chapters 
have dealt with the ITU, and I quote by memory "too internationalized". 
You see, the chapters are subject to different legislation, but more 
importantly - to different cultures, and the HQ sometimes forgets that. 
What works in Bulgaria for ISOC-Bulgaria, may not necessarily work for 
chapters in other countries. ISOC HQ knows that, but they sometimes 
forget it. And chapters also forget sometimes that ISOC HQ has to behave 
differently. They cannot take positions in controversial national 
issues, for example. Or, in some cases, they should not even try, as 
this may undermine the position and standing of the chapter, which may 
be viewed as a "tool of the American imperialism".


>    We are an ITU sector member and have full privileges in almost all 
> the work of ITU. The U.S. set the precedent by bringing 104 people on 
> the delegation to WCIT in Dubai; we can bring our best as well. As 
> someone who's been involved, I know that showing up and speaking 
> forcefully can make a difference. There are dozens of active ISOC 
> members who can advance our agenda in ITU, a crucial organization.

This is a good example, where we can show why ISOC HQ doesn't work well 
with the chapters.
ISOC, for one, could decide to share ALL documents from the ITU 
password-protected web sites with ALL of its members. Some of you know 
that the ITU documents are "secured" with a password, and that's why a 
whole site was created, www.wcitleaks.org, to allow sharing of documents 
among people, who don't have the TIES accounts from the ITU. Nothing can 
stop ISOC from doing this, immediately. But they don't, and that's where 
ISOC HQ could do more.

I will give another example, so that you understand better why there are 
still glitches between ISOC and the chapters, and why ISOC doesn't want 
to include chapters in their ITU-interactions:
ISOC Bulgaria has tried to find ways to cooperate with ISOC on bringing 
people to the main ITU events, and even more - we cooperated with ISOC 
Armenia and ISOC Poland in 2011, in order to have co-funding from ISOC 
HQ to bring people in Dubai, and the answer was that the project is too 
ambitious, and too international, and we should stuck to the national 
issues. This wasn't nice.
At the end of the day, some chapters managed to bring people to Dubai, 
and they played a small role in the deliberations around the main 
Internet-related topic. You never heard back from the chapters, who did 
that, because for them the important part was for the job to be done. At 
the same time, following the end of the WCIT, ISOC issued a statement, 
where they self-praised themselves for what they did during the 
conference. Not mentioning the chapters.


>    Let's do that and all work to make ISOC the open organization it 
> needs to be to support an open Internet. I'm lucky having personal 
> access to most participants but ISOC as an organization can bring far 
> more activists into the governance discussion.

Yes, it could, but it has not, so far. I am not sure they want to do it 
- as HQ, I mean. Individually, I am sure that they understand (I credit 
the staff here!) why having chapter representatives in their 
delegations, or supporting chapter delegates to go to meetings, would 
benefit the global Internet.

> To do our job, ISOC has to communicate across that divide. Internally, 
> that means staff needs to let the chapters in the developing world 
> come to the fore rather than trying to direct them.

Dave, I cannot agree with you that it's the staff job to do that. The 
staff does what the organization allows it. The staff are great people, 
and they do everything they can - within the guidelines, created in 
Reston! - to help the chapters. I know almost all the staff at ISOC, and 
I guarantee they are good folks.


-- 

Best,
Veni Markovski
http://www.isoc.bg

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/private/chapter-delegates/attachments/20131015/34cc04bf/attachment.htm>