[Chapter-delegates] ChAC Decision Needed: Proposal for greater Chapter participation in developing position & policy briefs

[Richard Hill]

Dear Christopher,

I speak here personally, and not as a member of the ChAC Steering Committee.

As far as I can tell, the text reflects the current structure of ISOC, in
which the staff reports to the Board and in which the Board makes all
decisions.

There have been various suggestions to change that, and the ChAC Steering
Committee is discussing the options and will likely create a working group
on the topic.

But, for now, I believe that we need to work within the existing ISOC
structure, so the text in question is as far as we can go.

I will refer your proposals below to the ChAC and make sure that they are
discussed in the future.

Best,
Richard

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Chapter-delegates [mailto:chapter-delegates-
> bounces at elists.isoc.org] On Behalf Of CW Mail
> Sent: Sunday, August 21, 2016 23:40
> To: Chapter Delegates
> Subject: Re: [Chapter-delegates] ChAC Decision Needed: Proposal for
> greater Chapter participation in developing position & policy briefs
> 
> Good evening:
> 
> I have read the proposal for greater involvement of Chapters . In
> general I support this initiative, based as it is on one of the primary
> objectives of the Chapters' Advisory Council as proposed in 2010.
> 
> I would however suggest that the role of the ISOC staff is overstated
> in the proposed text.
> 
> (a)	ISOC staff should act as the secretariat for the membership.
> 
> (b)	In most areas of policy, particularly those with a regional or
> national dimension, the staff do not have any better professional or
> political appreciation than our membership.
> 
> ( c)	It must be made quite clear by the staff that they do not intend
> to use their safeguards in the present draft text to override the
> opinion of the Chapters concerned.
> 
> (d)	Interested Chapters should take the initiative to prepare
> relevant policy statements for the Internet Society either regionally
> or globally.
> 
> Regards
> 
> CW
> 
> 
> On 19 Aug 2016, at 21:11, avri doria <avri at acm.org> wrote:
> 
> > Dear ChAC delegates,
> >
> > The ChAC Steering Committee has reviewed "A proposal for greater
> > involvement of Chapters in the position and policy brief development
> > process"  (below & attached) and is submitting it to the Chapter
> > Council for approval.
> >
> > Decisions by the ChAC are governed by the Rules & Procedure paragraph
> > 6
> >
> >> Substantive decisions, in particular regarding advice and
> >> recommendations, shall be made by the AC. Decisions may be made by
> >> electronic means (e.g. E-Mail, electronic voting systems, etc.) or
> >> during remote (audio/video conferencing) or physical meetings.
> >> Decisions shall normally be taken by consensus (meaning lack of
> >> formal opposition). If consensus cannot be achieved, then the Chair
> >> of the AC Steering Committee shall organize a vote. In case of
> >> voting, decisions shall be taken by a majority vote of the delegates
> >> to the AC. The quorum shall be nineteen (19) delegates. In case of
> >> tie, the matter will be resubmitted for discussion and a new vote.
> >> Votes will be secret. The tally of votes (for, against, abstain, did
> >> not vote) will be published. Abstentions will be counted towards
> determining the quorum.
> >
> > At this point I would like to open discussion on this proposal for
> the
> > next week - until 8/27 1200 UTC.  At that point I will initiate a
> > consensus call on the document, including any changes that may be
> > warranted as part of the discussion.  This consensus call will also
> be
> > scheduled for 1 week.  Should the document not meet with consensus, I
> > will then request that we continue discussion on it and will bring it
> > to a vote.
> >
> > Thank you
> >
> > Avri Doria
> >
> > (for the ChAC SC)
> >
> >
> > -----
> >
> > *A proposal for greater involvement of Chapters in the position and
> > policy brief development process*
> >
> > *Background*
> >
> > In the past, there have been occasions when ISOC staff met with
> > national policy makers without involving the national chapter in any
> > way. Since national chapters often have good relations with national
> > officials, it would be preferable if the chapters are also involved
> in
> > meetings with national officials. We propose a recommendation below
> to that effect.
> >
> > At present, there does not seem to be a consistent practice within
> > ISOC regarding the role of the membership in the policy development
> > process and the preparation of background and position papers that
> > ISOC puts forward. Specifically, some policy papers are submitted to
> > the membership for comment, specifically the policy briefs, while
> > others papers, such as position papers, are not. In one case, the
> > membership was not informed of a specific submission. It appears to
> us
> > that systematic consultation with the membership can only improve the
> > quality of a policy, background paper, or position paper. The intent
> > is not to change ISOC's current decision-making process for such
> > papers: staff would remain fully responsible for the final version of
> > the paper. The intent is to allow staff to benefit systematically
> from
> > the views of the membership, and to decide whether or how to
> > incorporate comments from the membership. We propose a recommendation
> below to that effect.
> >
> >
> > *Recommendations*
> >
> > Review with the relevant chapters, policy positions and alliances
> > before they are made, and inform them of meetings with national
> policy
> > makers, unless time constraints do not permit it. We have active
> > mailing lists that can make it quick and easy.
> >
> > In general, policy, background and position papers, including policy
> > briefs should be submitted to the membership for comment prior to
> > publication, with the understanding that staff retains full ownership
> > for the final version. Staff can choose the most appropriate method
> to
> > consult the membership, for example by asking for volunteers to
> review
> > drafts, by posting a draft for comment to a mailing list, by
> convening
> > a virtual meeting to discuss the issues, etc.
> >
> > Further, when papers are published and/or submitted to some entity
> > outside ISOC, the membership should be informed and a link to the
> > paper should be sent to the appropriate mailing list and to the
> > Chapter Delegate's mailing list just prior to the publication or
> submission.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ---
> > This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> > https://www.avast.com/antivirus
> > <A proposal for greater involvement of C...brief development process
> > on Box Notes.pdf>_______________________________________________
> > 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
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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