[Chapter-delegates] Renewal Internet Society Chapter Charter

Sat Oct 19 08:54:33 PDT 2013

Klaus, and all,
I could sign this on behalf of isoc-bulgaria, without even thinking :)
Very well and precisely said. Perhaps ISOC HQ should really rethink all
this.

On Saturday, October 19, 2013, Klaus Birkenbihl wrote:

> +1 Christian (and sorry Christian for dubls).
>
> I also don't foresee much change in practice if we sign the letter.
> Nevertheless it is the wrong thing at the wrong time. During the
> last years when chapters became more visible and active we
> discussed so many beautiful things that could give support and
> help to be more effective. E.g. Issue trackers to identify issues
> and track their resolution, wikis to support collaboration and
> many other things the Internet holds that other groups use
> to do better work. So next thing we expected to see was some
> progress here.
>
> But instead of picking up e.g. the prototype that was provided
> by Elena, we still lack reporting facilities for projects and
> problems, collaboration tools, we stick to the old
> work-intensive AMS to exchange our member data ...
> But what we get is another version of the LoA.
>
> Please keep in mind: it is effort, money and time that is
> provided by chapters members that is used to do the work.
> Financial support by ISOC is rather marginal. (Did you
> e.g ever manage to organize an event for $2000? For our
> last event even the fee for the room was higher.)
> Knowing that ISOC lacks the budget to pay them, chapters
> -though complaining once and a while- continue to work
> on this base.
>
> The LoA says ISOC wants you to perform such and such, wants
> to define a maximum number of terms for office holders
> [is this really a mission related concern?], and you
> need ["we believe in numbers"] to have that many
> individual members, [can it be summed-up with
> corporations? - AMS still don't let me
> report corporate members] and so forth. Read this
> while keeping in mind that its chapters time,
> chapters money, chapters effort. Doesn't it annoy
> you?
>
> I don't say we should be against again LoAs but given
> the situation as it is - they should be the result of
> negotiations and not a headquarters dictatorship.
>
> Maybe the newly to be created Chapters Advisory would be
> the group to develop a template that fulfills 2 criteria:
>   - it is balanced in terms of responsibility and control,
>     benefit and achievements
>   - it allow to be adjusted to needs of individual chapters
>     (e.g. those with a commercial branch, or with corporate
>     members, or with a special focus like accessibility ...)
> Such LoAs could have a real effect.
>
> Klaus
>
>
> Christian de Larrinaga wrote on 13.10.2013 12:44:
> > Veni
> >
> > I've done a quick analysis which has been forwarded on to the ISOC UK E
> > team. Without going into details until the local chapter has had time to
> > come to a considered view. My main concerns revolve around the
> > boundaries of responsibilities and self governance in and between ISOC
> > and chapters.
> >
> > Therefore section 3 in particular apart from perhaps the first point,
> > needs careful appraisal.
> >
> > What is outlined is pretty specific model for chapter governance which
> > is then described as the "minimum standard". Even though there is
> > probably nothing binding about signing this letter I fear it comes with
> > a set of expectations of it having some contractual status at ISOC which
> > is likely to cause a lot of problems mainly due to confusion of people
> > speaking across each other in 2014.
> >
> > One further observation. It is interesting to note that ISOC for its new
> > bylaws has been careful to describe itself as a mission led body not a
> > membership one. However the model described does not see that
> > possibility in chapters as well. The confusion as to the role and status
> > of ISOC individual members in ISOC has been resolved in its internal
> > governance but it continues for chapters.
> >
> > I'm not saying chapters don't want these people. The UK chapter known in
> > ISOC as ISOC UK England exists to get their voice and interests engaged.
> > But quite how best to structure that engagement within a governance
> > context really needs to be something for the local community to deal
> with.
> >
> > Perhaps ISOC could have rephrased its approach to a more sophisticated
> > one? Something like ISOC invites its chapters to support and engage with
> > individual members, organisational members and participants in IETF,
> > Regional Internet Registries etc .... and then offer to work with us to
> > develop useful programs for each of those communities to make practical
> > and sustainable activities?
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Christian
> >
> > Veni Markovski wrote:
> >> Hi, guys.
> >> I guess you have received similar letters?
> >>
> >> I already emailed Joyce that there are some issues with the
> >> requirements, mainly in the responsibility of the chapters ;-)
> >> Seems like ISOC is not concerned too much about the EU personal data
> >> protection, or the fact that may be in some chapters you cannot be a
> >> member of the global ISOC, or that in some cases the elections of the
> >> Board may not take place every year, or every two years; or that the
> >> number of terms may not be limited; or that filing updates with ISOC may
> >> mean extra weight on the chapters to produce the documents from the
> >> General Assembly in English; or that sharing information with the ISOC
> >> staff may not be appropriate; or that promoting ISOC strategic positions
> >> could be considered very inappropriate (what? considering the position
> >> of a US-based non-profit???).
> >>
> >> Further than that, they are telling us that if do not meet "one or more"
> >> of the "minimum standards", a process of "rejuvenation" will be
> initiated.
> >>
> >> Somehow I miss all these in the ISOC by-laws, but may be someone can
> >> enlightern us?
> >>
> >> thanks, and have a great Sunday!
> >>
> >> v.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> -------- Original Message --------
> >> Subject:     Renewal Internet Society Chapter Charter
> >> Date:        Fri, 11 Oct 2013 14:42:56 +0000
> >> From:        Joyce Dogniez <dogniez at isoc.org>
> >> To:  albena.arnaudova at gmail.com <albena.arnaudova at gmail.com>,
> >> mitko at mitko.com <mitko at mitko.com>, dgreve at isoc.bg <dgreve at isoc.bg>,
> >> veni at veni.com <ve--
> Klaus Birkenbihl
> http://www.klaus-birkenbihl.de
>
> --
> Klaus Birkenbihl
> Treasurer and Board member
> Internet Society German Chapter e.V. (ISOC.DE)
> c/o ict-Media GmbH
> http://www.isoc.de/
>
> _______________________________________________
> As an Internet Society Chapter Officer you are automatically subscribed
> to this list, which is regularly synchronized with the Internet Society
> Chapter Portal (AMS): https://portal.isoc.org
>

-- 
Best,
Veni
http://veni.com
https://facebook.com/venimarkovski
https://twitter.com/veni

***
The opinions expressed above are those of
the author, not of any organizations,
associated with or related to him in
any given way.
***

== Sent from my phone, so any spelling mistakes are caused by the
touchscreen keyboard.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/private/chapter-delegates/attachments/20131019/4942a3b4/attachment.htm>