[Chapter-delegates] Bringing Multistakeholder to ISOC: The first task of our New Collaborative Governance Project

Thu Mar 29 06:23:06 PDT 2018

Dear Dave,

I agree with EVERYTHING that you say here on the stakeholder driven
approach. At the same time, the Internet Society has worked in a certain
style, and has broadly preserved the Internet Model, has broadly succeeded
in working with Governments and other stakeholders. While there is a strong
basis for discussing improvements, it is also necessary to understand that
in ways are easily seen or appreciated, ISOC has done well.

Any exercise in redefining the way ISOC works needs to remember that ISOC
has done well.  Such an exercise ought not to be entirely dismissive of the
present style of working. A part of this style, an element of this style is
also needed to be retained, while making ISOC "stakeholder-driven, open,
transparent and consensus-driven" in your words.

Sivasubramanian M

Sivasubramanian M <https://www.facebook.com/sivasubramanian.muthusamy>
twitter.com/shivaindia

On Thu, Mar 29, 2018 at 6:30 PM, Dave Burstein <daveb at dslprime.com> wrote:

> Folks
>
> We all know decisions in ISOC remain top down, despite at least six years
> of effort to make ISOC multistakeholder. I therefore urge the new ISOC
> Collaborative Governance Project to set its first goal to bring these
> principles to ISOC before we tell others what to do.
>
> It's led by Larry Strickling, who is one of the most effective people in
> D.C. He can make things happen. Sally has urged us to join the call in
> about an hour, and I hope I'm not the only one to speak up.
>
> Here is our definition of multi-stakeholder and suggested ways we can
> implement it.
>
>    -
>
>    Stakeholder-driven: Stakeholders determine the process and decisions,
>    from agenda setting to workflow, rather than simply fulfilling an advisory
>    role;
>
> Let's see if we, the stakeholders, can direct this process to first
> improving ISOC.
>
>    -
>
>    Open: Any stakeholder may participate and the process includes and
>    integrates the viewpoints of a diverse range of stakeholders;
>
> A diverse range of viewpoints would be great. Until recently, our home
> page called for "like-minded people." The first step should be allowing
> comments on the ISOC blog and web site articles and welcome blog
> submissions from people in the chapters.
>
> As we know, the Internet community has a strong North-South split, the
> U.S. and allies against the BRICs and most of the rest of the world. Many
> Internet users, in my opinion a majority, believe that decisions about the
> Internet that are not dominated by the U.S. and allies.
>
> Larry, who is in charge here, has a chance to prove he can rise above his
> role in the U.S. government. He was co-leader of the U,S, WCIT delegation
> that walked out of the leading International meeting when we didn't get our
> way.
>
>    -
>
>    Transparent: All stakeholders and the public have access to
>    deliberations, creating an environment of trust, legitimacy, and
>    accountability; and
>
> Please, please, bring this to ISOC. The most important decision in recent
> ISOC history, the Chapters Committee proposal to give the chapters some
> funding and independence, was turned down in a closed session of the board.
> Very ugly. 3% of out budget is not very much but would make a difference.
>
> Another crucial improvement would be to provide information about our
> donors. We know that has been a factor in deciding what ISOC addresses but
> someone made a policy we should not report our funders.
>
> It would also be good if we were more honest, starting with our home page
> figures for members and chapters. About half the claimed chapters are
> defunct.
>
>    -
>
>    Consensus-based: Outcomes are consensus-based, arrived at by
>    compromise, and are a win-win for the greatest number or diversity of
>    stakeholders.
>
> Starting with what the Collaborative Governance Project addresses. It
> seems to already have an agenda made by the staff.
>
> In particular, we should make sure the current choice of a new President
> is consensus driven. One prominent candidate has been strongly opposed by
> many on this chapter-delegates list but I believe is still under
> consideration. Unless he can show he supports more chapter power in making
> ISOC decisions, he would not have a chance at being a consensus choice.
> -------------
>
> When I say things like this, I always get emails with strong support.
> Kathy, Raul, and the board should look closely at why others won't speak
> publicly. A first step would be a strong statement that chapter funding is
> not dependent on agreeing with management.
>
> In addition, the CEO should immediately make a clear statement that
> publicly disagreeing with the official position will not impeded a
> staffer's career. I've known Kathy for many years to be a person of good
> faith, but the consistently "like-minded" public comments from staff
> suggest they don't see it that way.
>
> All my opinions, of course.
>
> Dave
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Editor, http://Fastnet.news http://wirelessone.news
> http://massivemimo.rocks gfastnews.com
> Author with Jennie Bourne  DSL (Wiley) and Web Video: Making It Great,
> Getting It Noticed (Peachpit)
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20180329/3c04100a/attachment.htm>