[Chapter-delegates] Obvious right choice: Make Chapter proposals "recommendations"

[Dave Burstein]

All

The 61 and counting emails on the proposal make it clear there is no
consensus. We are already arguing over whether actively promoting a
specific policy choice is or is not "lobbying."

That's an incredible waste of member time over semantics. It's also very
expensive; one of the staffers weighing in costs ISOC about $2,000/day.

If multi-stakeholder is more than a hollow slogan, this obvious lack of
consensus should send everything back to the drafting committee.

*But many of the ideas make good sense and chapters will happily
incorporate them.* So let's move forward and accomplish what this should be
about: more effective chapters.
--------------
Kathy - Please comment here. I doubt the direct staffers would take action
here unless they knew you backed it.
---------------
I call on members of this list to pick out the good ideas in this proposal,
including by pointing them out here. I think we can agree on most of them.
Then we can suggest the Chapters committee as well as the staff, put them
out as recommendations.

No one has identified here abuses that would justify heavy handed action;
staff has plenty of authority already to take action when they find the
inevitable bad actors.

ISOC staff will never have the time to even observe whether most of these
"rules" are being followed by chapters around the world, much less enforce
them.

*We already spend $2 or $3 in staff time for every $ under the partial
control of chapters. *That's incredibly wasteful micromanagement.

We don't even know how many chapters we have. Our new website says 100+;
when we tried to calculate the cost of the chapter funding proposal, staff
told us it was likely more like 50-60.

We also have an obviously inflated count of members. The home page of our
web site should not have claims with the veracity of a campaigning
politician.
-------------------------

Most ISOC members and chapters don't care enough to write to the list.
Others are reluctant because they seek funding for the chapter,
international trips, etc.

That so many have commented suggests a great deal of unspoken doubt.

The politically smart move would therefore be to back away from something
that would be almost as effective as a recommendation.

That probably won't happen unless Kathy speaks up. It's hard for staffers
to back down; we all have egos.

It can't be right for the chapters to think a few bureaucrats have the
right to tell them what to do, even if the people involved are well-meaning
and respected.

Dave


-- 
Editor, Fast Net News, WIreless One.news, Net Policy News and DSL Prime
Author with Jennie Bourne  DSL (Wiley) and Web Video: Making It Great,
Getting It Noticed (Peachpit)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/private/chapter-delegates/attachments/20170803/be69107a/attachment.htm>