[Chapter-delegates] ChAC-SC Advice notice

Thu Feb 27 07:03:44 PST 2020

Dear Mike,

Thanks for this. I used the word “full” merely to distinguish the Steering Committee list from the full list. I did not mean to imply anything else. I will let Eduoardo comment on his use of “unanimous”.

The document sent to the Board clearly indicates that there is lack of consensus regarding many issues, and, in my view, it is a call for further discussions.

So, from my point of view, there was no effort, conscious or unconscious, to eliminate any appearance of dissent or need for further discussions. Quite the contrary.

Best,

Richard

From: Mike Godwin [mailto:mnemonic at gmail.com] 
Sent: Thursday, February 27, 2020 15:56
To: Richard Hill
Cc: Franca Palazzo; Narelle Clark; ISOC Chapter Delegates
Subject: Re: [Chapter-delegates] ChAC-SC Advice notice

Dear Richard,

It is the nature of my work that I'm obligated to pay attention to what you call "procedural niceties." Many people think "procedural" concerns are relatively unimportant, but in the context of policy recommendations and decisions it is often the case that adherence to procedural norms minimizes the risks of misinformation and misperception. 

It seems possible, speaking as someone who was not a participant in this particular set of deliberations, although I have experienced similar deliberations in other contents, that there may have been an conscious effort to communicate that there was more "unanimous" or "full" participation in an important deliberation than, in practice, there was. It's also possible that there wasn't. But adhering to good procedural practice reduces uncertainty about these questions.

If you are trying to say, Richard, that there was no active effort to eliminate any appearance of dissent or desire for further discussion, , through the adroit use of "procedural niceties" or the particular choices of words like "unanimous" or "full,"  then I think it's good for you and other participants to say so expressly here.

Mike Godwin

On Thu, Feb 27, 2020 at 9:36 AM Richard Hill <rhill at hill-a.ch> wrote:

Dear Mike,

There was indeed a request to postpone the deadline for the consensus call, but the request was opposed. Since there was no consensus to postpone the deadline, the Chair of the ChAC (in my view correctly) ruled that the deadline would not be postponed.

Please recall that this is about non-binding advice to the Board, so it seems unproductive to me to be quibbling about procedural niceties.

Best,

Richard

From: Mike Godwin [mailto:mnemonic at gmail.com] 
Sent: Thursday, February 27, 2020 14:29
To: Franca Palazzo
Cc: Narelle Clark; Richard Hill; ISOC Chapter Delegates
Subject: Re: [Chapter-delegates] ChAC-SC Advice notice

Franca, you are not the only person from whom I have heard that there was a call for further discussion and that this call was actively discouraged or suppressed. 

In general, in larger United Nations or civil-society contexts, calls for further discussion are normally an indicator that driving a collective resolution towards consensus approval is premature. 

Mike Godwin

On Thu, Feb 27, 2020 at 3:37 AM Franca Palazzo via Chapter-delegates <chapter-delegates at elists.isoc.org> wrote:

I do not agree that silence is consent.  

The Canadian Chapter does not necessarily agree with this submission in its entirety.

I asked for further discussion and was immediately pounced on.  

Our chapter should not be associated as agreeing with these recommendations. 

We dont have the time nor the resources to properly engage on this. 

I had not realized we could call for a vote.  It would seem to me that this should have been done. 

Get Outlook for Android <https://aka.ms/ghei36> 

  _____  

From: Chapter-delegates <chapter-delegates-bounces at elists.isoc.org> on behalf of Narelle Clark via Chapter-delegates <chapter-delegates at elists.isoc.org>
Sent: Wednesday, February 26, 2020 7:00:45 PM
To: Richard Hill <rhill at hill-a.ch>
Cc: ISOC Chapter Delegates <chapter-delegates at elists.isoc.org>
Subject: Re: [Chapter-delegates] ChAC-SC Advice notice 

Hi Richard

Would you mind giving an overview of the process used, or pointing me at a description of it?

Much appreciated 

Narelle 

On Thu, 27 Feb. 2020, 2:02 am Richard Hill via Chapter-delegates, <chapter-delegates at elists.isoc.org> wrote:

Dear John,

I disagree with your inference below. The consensus call clearly indicated that lack of opposition (silence) would indicate approval. That’s not an unusual way to seek approval, it it is used in many circumstances.  And it is the method foreseen in the ChAC’s operating rules.

So, if we believe  in rules and procedures, then we must accept that the advice represents the consensus of the Chapters.

Best,

Richard

From: Chapter-delegates [mailto:chapter-delegates-bounces at elists.isoc.org] On Behalf Of John More via Chapter-delegates
Sent: mercredi, 26. février 2020 15:30
To: Gonzalo Camarillo
Cc: Chapters AC Elist; Chapter Delegates
Subject: Re: [Chapter-delegates] ChAC-SC Advice notice

Gonzalo

The failure of the large majority of Chapter delegates to communicate in the call for consensus does indicate that the recommendations do not reflect a broad consensus in the ISOC community.  They reflect the concerns of the more activist Chapters.

Yours,

John More

Delegate, ISOC-DC

On Feb 26, 2020, at 6:14 AM, Gonzalo Camarillo via Chapter-delegates <chapter-delegates at elists.isoc.org> wrote:

Hi Eduardo,

thanks for putting together the three documents with advice to the Board. The Board will discuss them and get back to you in order to continue the dialog.

In addition, as you know, we have been working for several years with you and the previous ChAC chairs to find ways for us to engage the community more effectively. Unfortunately, that still seems to be a challenge. Per the thread below, where you seem to have discussed this advice, around 80 to 85% of our 124 chapters did not participate in the discussions or express any opinion on the advice at all:

 <https://connect.internetsociety.org/communities/community-home?CommunityKey=2ee50649-4a00-4918-83a5-4c8a9a7c7a4c> https://connect.internetsociety.org/communities/community-home?CommunityKey=2ee50649-4a00-4918-83a5-4c8a9a7c7a4c

We hope to continue working with you on finding ways to engage a much larger fraction of our community in the future, especially when dealing with important issues.

With the above in mind, it is unfortunately inappropriate to say that this advice was approved by *unanimous* consensus since most of the community did not even participate in the discussions (after receiving your advice, several people from different chapters indeed told me they had actually not noticed the discussions on the advice at all). Therefore, I am cc'ing the 'Chapter Delegates' mailing list on this email so that as many people as possible from our community are aware of these advice and our upcoming response.

I have also noticed that you decided not to include any information that was made available after February 10th, including the recently announced PIC. Well, we can discuss that on the webinar on Friday. I am looking forward to that.

Cheers,

Gonzalo

Chair - ISOC Board of Trustees

From: Eduardo Diaz < <mailto:eduardodiazrivera at gmail.com> eduardodiazrivera at gmail.com> 
Sent: Monday, February 24, 2020 04:22
To: Gonzalo Camarillo < <mailto:gonzalo.camarillo at ericsson.com> gonzalo.camarillo at ericsson.com>; Kevin Craemer < <mailto:Craemer at isoc.org> Craemer at isoc.org>
Cc: Chapters AC Elist < <mailto:ChaptersAC-SC at elists.isoc.org> ChaptersAC-SC at elists.isoc.org>
Subject: ChAC-SC Advice notice

Distinguished Members of the Board:

The Chapter Advisory Council Steering Committee (ChAC-SC) is submitting the following advice for your consideration:

1.	Advice 2020.02.13-01 ::  <https://isoc.box.com/s/amwx365bl2w38gh3laxneo2pv1q4w1jy> The sale of PIR to Ethos Capital should not proceed unless a number of conditions are met.
2.	Advice 2020.02.13-02 ::  <https://isoc.box.com/s/3gey7i3gbqomurwfhhuvxqq49ms0hwm3> ISOC constituencies must be consulted
3.	Advice 2020.02.13-03 ::  <https://isoc.box.com/s/fhl9ako4i1a4m2ivxuaez42y4vapeoyb> Changes to ISOC’s Bylaws to strengthen Advisory Councils and Chapters

The Full Chapter Advisory Council (Full ChAC) approved all Advice by unanimous consensus. No objections were received by the set deadline.

Please note that Advice #1 is based on information available as of 10 February 2020.

Thank you for the opportunity to work with you to make ISOC a better organization.

Eduardo Díaz

Chair

ChAC-SC

_______________________________________________
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://admin.internetsociety.org/622619/User/Login> https://admin.internetsociety.org/622619/User/Login
View the Internet Society Code of Conduct:  <https://www.internetsociety.org/become-a-member/code-of-conduct/> https://www.internetsociety.org/become-a-member/code-of-conduct/

_______________________________________________
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://admin.internetsociety.org/622619/User/Login
View the Internet Society Code of Conduct: https://www.internetsociety.org/become-a-member/code-of-conduct/

_______________________________________________
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://admin.internetsociety.org/622619/User/Login
View the Internet Society Code of Conduct: https://www.internetsociety.org/become-a-member/code-of-conduct/

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/private/chapter-delegates/attachments/20200227/d9009b97/attachment.htm>