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

Mon Aug 22 02:41:32 PDT 2016

Thanks for this.

Regarding comment (1), I believe that the current language correctly reflects the current respective roles of staff and members, because staff reports directly to the Board, and it is the Board that makes decisions.

Best,

Richard

From: Chapter-delegates [mailto:chapter-delegates-bounces at elists.isoc.org] On Behalf Of Satish Babu
Sent: Monday, August 22, 2016 06:15
To: CW Mail
Cc: Chapter Delegates
Subject: Re: [Chapter-delegates] ChAC Decision Needed: Proposal for greater Chapter participation in developing position & policy briefs

Thanks for this initiative. I consider it very relevant. Some comments:

1. "...with the understanding that staff retains full ownership for the final version" is overstating the case a bit. Although there is no question that Staff have to steer the document through multiple consultations with members (and other stakeholders) to reach a final version, the current language ("full ownership") does not seem to acknowledge the sovereign role of the membership. Perhaps a milder reformulation that balances the respective roles of staff and members would help.

2. Although it's somewhat on a tangent, I would also like to point out that there is a very real gap in countries where there are multiple Internet Society Chapters without a 'national' chapter. For instance, India has five local ISOC chapters, but no national chapter nor a national co-ordination body. In many countries, there is a role for a country-level civil society organization for Internet-related aspects that can liaise, co-ordinate and work in other ways with the national government. This is perhaps a good role for an ISOC Chapter (or other grouping ISOC structure made of members/chapters). The risk is that if ISOC does not provide such a structure, other non-ISOC structures/organizations will emerge to claim this space. 

satish

On Mon, Aug 22, 2016 at 3:10 AM, CW Mail <mail at christopherwilkinson.eu> wrote:

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

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/private/chapter-delegates/attachments/20160822/008dd8d7/attachment.htm>