[Chapter-delegates] Chapter advice on live streaming
Winthrop Yu
w.yu at gmx.net
Wed Feb 5 05:24:28 PST 2025
This has been on my mind, and I had been hoping for at least a gesture of good
faith. Instead, adding insult to injury, Joly has yet again been shabbily
treated. Like Cheryl, I am deeply disappointed, but like her and many others I
am sure we appreciate and remember the exceptional work that Joly has done and
continues to do, even as others seem to be taking credit for Joly's work.
As ISOC HQ Board elections near, I would recommend a careful re-reading of the
posts that Charles and Eduardo made back in September 2024, these can be found
towards the bottom of this thread.
WYn
Philippines
On 2/4/2025 6:57 AM, Joly MacFie via Chapter-delegates wrote:
> Hi Charles,
>
> AFAIK the way that YouTube works that the 13 days ago was the day they were
> made 'public', they may have been uploaded and 'unlisted' before that.
>
> The more reliable date is that the channel 'joined' on Aug 14, 2024.
>
> Now, ISOC-NY's BTN rejection letter was dated July 16 2024. I remember being
> surprised because, at BoT 181 on June 22, I was pretty sure I had heard Andrew
> Sullivan deflect a question from Cheryl on this, by saying funding had just
> been approved for the archiving.
>
> I assumed this meant our grant application.Wiser now.
>
> Joly
>
>
> On Mon, Feb 3, 2025 at 5:02 PM Charles Mok (gmail) <charlespmok at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> Joly, you are right that most or all of us are unaware of the new channel.
> Looking at it, it seems that all the videos in there were uploaded en
> masse 13 days ago. I wonder if I missed any public announcements about it
> over the last two weeks? Or maybe an announcement about it will be coming?
> In any case, we will have some questions to ask.
>
> Charles
>
>
> On Mon, Feb 3, 2025 at 1:56 PM Joly MacFie via Chapter-delegates
> <chapter-delegates at elists.isoc.org> wrote:
>
>
> Thanks Chreyl,
>
> The silver lining is of course that the material *IS* available, if
> not in proper archive form, and chapters can go ahead and find their
> stuff on that channel and upgrade legacy links, embeds etc.appropriately
>
> Joly
>
> On Mon, Feb 3, 2025 at 4:50 PM Cheryl Langdon-Orr
> <langdonorr at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Jolly, I am very disappointed with how all this is being "managed"
> I must say, Thank YOU for YOUR extraordinary service to us in
> volunteer/Chapter land for so many years in this actually
> quite demanding area. and **HUGE SIGH**
>
> <https://about.me/cheryl.LangdonOrr?promo=email_sig&utm_source=product&utm_medium=email_sig&utm_campaign=gmail_api&utm_content=thumb>
>
> Cheryl Langdon-Orr
> about.me/cheryl.LangdonOrr
> <https://about.me/cheryl.LangdonOrr?promo=email_sig&utm_source=product&utm_medium=email_sig&utm_campaign=gmail_api&utm_content=thumb>
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, 4 Feb 2025 at 08:04, Joly MacFie via Chapter-delegates
> <chapter-delegates at elists.isoc.org> wrote:
>
> Thank you for your support!
>
> ISOC Zambia does great work.
>
> On Mon, Feb 3, 2025 at 3:43 PM levy syanseke
> <lsyanseke at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> This is a hard read.
> Thanks Joly, for your hard work and commitment to the
> Internet Society.
>
> I do hope recognition of your work goes beyond word to
> probably being rewarded, especially following the new
> channel with most of your work and you havent been
> consulted or engaged.
>
> I wish you well. I do remember our first work when the
> chapter was launched, your work is indeed great.
>
> I wish you well once again.
>
> Regards
>
>
> Levy Syanseke
>
> Media Studies Tutor | Ramah Designs
> <https://web.facebook.com/ramahdesigns/> - Founder
>
> Internet Society Zambia Chapter <https://isoczambia.org> -
> Founding president
>
> Youth IGF Movement <https://youthigf.com/>- Community
> Coordinator
>
>
>
>
> +260 978 210 494 <tel:+260+978+210+494>
>
> lsyanseke at gmail.com
>
> <https://ramahdesigns.business.site/>
>
> God Loves You!
>
>
> On Mon, Feb 3, 2025 at 9:11 PM Joly MacFie via
> Chapter-delegates <chapter-delegates at elists.isoc.org> wrote:
>
> I have a further update on this issue i.e. the
> preservation of the Livestream.com archive.
>
> As you may recall ISOC Foundation rejected ISOC-NY's
> small grant request for $1200 expenses on the basis
> "*the total number of requests we receive exceed the
> amount of funding we have available and we must select
> projects most closely aligned to the goals of our
> Foundation*."
>
> Faced with the prospect of 1000+ ISOC events
> disappearing into the ether, in the last weeks of
> November I dug into my personal savings, and went
> ahead on my own. It turned out that a) scraping was a
> little more complicated than I had thought, and b)
> there was mode data than I had imagined so that I
> ended up needing 3 drives. The total expenses were
> $1670.94
>
> The scraping process took a over two weeks. ISOC's 3
> accounts were due to expire in the second week of
> December, and it was a race against time to bring in
> all the data. As it turned out, only Channel 3 was
> immediately deleted. Fortunately we just got it all in
> time.
>
> Meanwhile the Internet Archive itself was having
> issues. It had been hacked and access was
> severely limited. They had their hands full. The task
> remained (and remains) to reshape the raw JSON
> metadata into something that their system can ingest.
>
> But at least everything was safe. The idea was
> proposed, and informally discussed, with Chris Locke,
> that ISOC Foundation could be approached to cover my
> outlay and the further processing cost.
>
> And that was where it stood, until this week, when to
> my total surprise, it was revealed that ISOC had
> opened it's own YouTube Channel '*Internet Society
> On-Deman*d
> <https://www.youtube.com/@InternetSocietyOnDemand>' in
> August, and by some method, either scraping or via
> Vimeo, itself collected and posted 5.1k videos from
> Livestream! It posits itself : " Watch past Internet
> Society streamed and recorded events and videos all in
> one place. " Written by someone with a sense of
> humour, obviously!
>
> Every single one of these videos is my work.Was I
> consulted/informed at any point? No. Were even other
> ISOC people who might have told me informed? Were
> Chapter Leaders informed? No. Were Chapter Trustees
> informed? No. No.
>
> Was someone else paid a good deal of money to do this?
> Probably.
>
> How I discovered this at all is because when, earlier
> in the week, the Cybersecurity SIG had requested
> funding to have me livestream a forthcoming event,
> they were told, we have our own channel now, why do
> you need Joly at all?l
>
> If a SIG or chapter wants to record their event
> via Zoom, they can send it to us and we will post
> it on our Internet Society on Demand YouTube page,
> https://www.youtube.com/@InternetSocietyOnDemand
> If you require live streaming (not sure how this
> differs from leveraging your current Zoom account
> and inviting members to join.), please provide a
> document with rationale, benefit, and associated
> costs for Joly's services and we can apply through
> the external contractor process.
>
>
> So, as Chapters/SIGS I work with know there are
> several things ISOC LIVE does beyond just reposting
> Zooms, e.g. co-promoting their events, recompositing
> the streams live, simulcasting (including to regional
> FB pages before they removed my access) , editing the
> recordings, making and correcting transcripts etc
> etc. It shou;d be easy enough to ,ale a quick
> Statement of Work for that stuff. We'll see the response.
>
> But SIGs are a special case,.Unlike Chapters that are
> chartered entities, SIGS are internal projects and
> funded internally. I suspect that any Chapter looking
> for similar funding will be referred to the BTN Small
> Grants process (wherever it reappears) with its 8 week
> run up etc. As I have said before, this is basically
> a non-starter, since in all my days I've rarely if
> ever had more than a few days notice of a Chapter
> livestream. Nevertheless, a draft Statement of Work
> will be created that Chapters can use for this purpose.
>
> In the bigger picture the way this has been done is
> just another example of ISOC Staff imposing top-down
> solutions, but, in this case, underhandedly, in the
> face of vociferous advocacy from the community.
>
> My feeling on this is that Chapters should act
> collectively to take control of their media output,
> say a Chapters Media Council or similar, that, given
> ISOC's failings in this area, both in vision and
> practice, could take over ISOC LIVE, and contract me,
> or someone else, to keep up the work.
>
> This I suspect would also satisfy ISOC Comms, who
> plainly want to maintain a clear distinction between
> Chapters output and that of ISOC itself, in order to
> focus their messaging. They have never promoted the
> livestreaming (with the notable exception of the PIR
> fiasco).
>
> Joly
>
>
>
> On Fri, Sep 27, 2024 at 1:50 PM Caleb Ogundele via
> Chapter-delegates <chapter-delegates at elists.isoc.org>
> wrote:
>
> /Speaking in my personal capacity./
>
> Many thanks, Charles you for sharing your
> thoughts, which resonate with some of my own
> reflections. I have been following this
> conversation closely, and while I may have a
> different perspective on certain comments made by
> a few other persons in this thread, I want to
> emphasize that ISOC is community-driven and
> community-powered. Engaging in discussions like
> this makes us better, as we can all learn from one
> another and work towards earning each other’s trust.
>
> For the record, I support open engagement that
> enhances our Chapter, even though my fiduciary
> duty at this point is to ISOC.org, which limits
> the extent of my engagement as a member of ISOC's
> Board of Trustees. However, I will always advocate
> that community comes first, and ISOC is no
> exception in the multistakeholder approach we have
> all championed. As an African proverb states, “It
> takes a whole village to raise a child.” For ISOC
> to become what we all envision in that child I see
> in that proverb, it must always be driven by
> engagement within our community.
>
> I want to express my gratitude to all the
> community members who have relentlessly engaged on
> this topic. I believe that the concerned
> individuals in this thread are listening, and
> listening is a key component of accountability. I
> am optimistic that taking the right steps to earn
> the community's trust and needs is important and I
> hope this issue will soon be resolved.
>
> Thank you.
>
> Best regards,
> *Caleb Ogundele*
> Chapter Elected,
> ISOC Board of Trustees Member
>
>
> On Fri, Sep 27, 2024 at 3:07 AM Charles Mok
> (gmail) via Chapter-delegates
> <chapter-delegates at elists.isoc.org> wrote:
>
> Thanks Eduardo.
>
> Eduardo you are right that chapters and our
> members form an important part of who ISOC is.
> In "About Us" on our website, you see we
> prominently mentioned "128,265" Members, "131"
> chapters and SIGs, and 84 OMs. This is by no
> means to compare which is/are more important,
> but it is also fair to say that without
> chapters, we will become more like a trade or
> industry consortium, which is clearly not what
> ISOC wants to be seen as.
>
> But I also want to go back to the points that
> Barry talked about. (Following Barry's lead, I
> also say here for the record that I am a
> trustee elected by chapters.)
>
> The point that Barry (and Luis)
> reiterated that "once any of us becomesa
> trustee we arenot representing the community
> that put us here: we are representing the
> Internet Society itself and acting in the
> interest of the Society as a whole" is true.
> But, to me, this is more about how the
> communities (including chapters, their leaders
> and members) should perceive the trustees,
> more than binding what they trustees should
> "care about." It is true that it is common
> that chapters may have the "wrong perception"
> that their elected trustees "represent" them,
> or possibly also the same perception exists
> for some in the OM or IETF communities too.
> But that has more to do with the constituents'
> perception and hence expectation, more than
> what it should limit what the trustees can or
> should do. In fact, it shouldn't. As a
> trustee, I believe we can still advocate for
> chapters, oir OMs, or IETF, or anyone else.
> The fortunate part of it is that there
> shouldn't be a "zero sum" scenario among ISOC
> constituents and the Internet communities as a
> whole. After all, in virtually all situations,
> I strongly believe what is good for the
> chapters as a whole should be good for the
> other communities, and vice versa. Even what's
> good for the OM community "as a whole" (not
> individual company members) should be good for
> chapters and the whole Internet community too.
> So why not? Even when we talk about this case
> about live streaming, those in the OM or IETF
> communities can listen to and benefit from it,
> and I am sure some do too, right? So, I choose
> to advocate for any or all of them
> as appropriate for the matter, rather than
> avoiding any one (or all) of them, including
> the constituent that just happens to have
> elected me to the board.
>
> And about the point that the board should not
> interfere with management actions, I agree too
> that is proper. The board should not
> micromanage the executive management. But that
> does not mean that the board must collectively
> agree with or defend any (past or present)
> management decision either. Otherwise, it may
> be the management micromanaging the minds of
> individual board trustees :) That would not be
> a nice thing :) Of course, due to
> confidentiality, trustees (and management too)
> should not discuss the details of the
> proceedings in the board. But, that should not
> be necessarily construed as that the board
> collectively agrees completely and without any
> reservation with any or management decisions,
> the kind of thing that we just said the board
> cannot interfere with in the first place. So,
> there may be some management decisions that
> some trustees may choose not to defend.
>
> As Barry well said, "management has to have
> the freedom and flexibility to handle
> day-to-day operations as it sees appropriate,
> within the strategic plan that we worked with
> them to
> create." It should and can also have the
> freedom and flexibility to change course and
> make revisions to policies or executive
> decisions based on new information, feedback
> received from the communities, and plainly
> learning to fix something that did not work
> very well.
>
> There have been a lot of useful discussions
> here. It is unfortunate that the past decision
> has got us to this point. For that, as they
> say, it is what it is, or, it was what it was.
> Looking to the future, I think we can move on,
> and it seems pretty clear that there are ways
> (including some discussed in the thread here)
> that can lead to a better outcome.
>
> Charles
>
>
> On Wed, Sep 18, 2024 at 2:45 PM Eduardo Diaz
> via Chapter-delegates
> <chapter-delegates at elists.isoc.org> wrote:
>
> Barry,
>
> I appreciate your insights regarding the
> responsibilities of the Board of Trustees
> for the entire Internet Society. However,
> it is crucial to recognize that most of
> the Internet Society's composition
> consists of its chapters. The ISOC
> chapters serve as the organization's
> foundation; without them, ISOC would face
> considerable challenges in effectively
> communicating its message. With
> approximately 128,000 members, the
> chapters are essential in mobilizing and
> engaging the broader community. When
> individuals join a chapter, they become
> ISOC global members before selecting their
> preferred chapter, emphasizing the
> chapters' importance in representing the
> entire ISOC community.
>
> The Chapter Advisory Council (ChAC) was
> established in the ISOC bylaws to ensure a
> unified voice for all chapters, allowing
> them to present issues pertinent to their
> members. Consequently, when the Board
> receives formal advice from the ChAC, it
> should be regarded as a collective
> perspective from its chapters. Given that
> the Board does not engage in operational
> matters, it would have been prudent to
> thoroughly review the ISOC strategic
> documents to identify areas where the
> functionality explicitly requested by the
> chapters could be integrated into the
> strategy and then request the ISOC CEO to
> implement it. I believe this consideration
> needed to be adequately addressed by all
> the trustees, particularly given the
> informal way it was discussed. The Board's
> request to present this issue to the staff
> has been interpreted as a lack of concern
> for the chapters.
>
> So, I would like to ask whether the
> trustees are willing to consider a bylaw
> change that would allow the ChAC to send
> formal advice to the ISOC CEO regarding
> matters deemed operational. Absent such a
> change, staff may overlook valuable
> advice, resulting in a lack of incentive
> for them to respond or take official
> action, and the chapters will have no
> other avenue to voice these concerns.
>
>
> -ed
>
> Just an ISOC member
>
>
> On Wed, Sep 18, 2024 at 10:51 AM Barry
> Leiba via Chapter-delegates
> <chapter-delegates at elists.isoc.org> wrote:
>
>
> I'm responding to something in Luis's
> note, but it's not really a
> response to Luis -- it's a
> clarification of what the roles are.
>
> > Our BOT elected members (and of
> course, IETF and OMAC ones if
> isolated) are a minority in the Board
> > and they are promptly remembered
> that they are not representing a
> sector but the Internet Society as a
> > whole, as written in the legal
> framework.
>
> For the record: I'm a trustee who was
> elected by the Organization Members.
>
> First, on the "minority" point, I want
> to highlight that the
> Organization Members used to select
> half the board, six members.
> Three each were selected by the
> Chapters and by the Standards
> Community (the IETF, trustees
> appointed by the IAB). This change
> around ten years ago to the current
> balance -- one Organization
> selection was transferred to the
> Chapters, and one to the IETF -- so
> we now have each of the three
> communities having an equal say (four
> trustees each) in the constitution of
> the board. We also have a
> thirteenth trustee now (Funke Baruwa),
> who was appointed by the board
> itself and whose background lies
> outside all three of those
> communities.
>
> Second, as Luis said and which can't
> be stressed enough, once any of
> us becomes a trustee we are not
> representing the community that put us
> here: we are representing the Internet
> Society itself and acting in
> the interest of the Society as a
> whole. We have both a legal and
> moral responsibility to do that. Of
> course, we each come with our
> respective individual backgrounds and
> experience, which certainly
> affects our individual views, and that
> diversity is crucial in getting
> a broad global perspective. Sometimes
> that means that we have
> different views of what is best for
> the Society. But it doesn't
> change the basic truth that we are all
> acting not as representatives
> of the communities we came from, but
> as trustees of the Internet
> Society.
>
> Third, the board's role is never to
> manage operational decisions for
> running the Society -- that's the job
> of the Internet Society
> management. It is to work with the
> Society to set strategic
> direction, to oversee the mission of
> the Society. A board that would
> micromanage things would be
> overstepping its role and would be toxic
> to the health of the organization,
> whose management has to have the
> freedom and flexibility to handle
> day-to-day operations as it sees
> appropriate, within the strategic plan
> that we worked with them to
> create.
>
> Barry Leiba
> Internet Society trustee
> _______________________________________________
> 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://community.internetsociety.org.
> -
> View the Internet Society Code of
> Conduct:
> https://www.internetsociety.org/become-a-member/code-of-conduct/
>
>
>
> --
> *Notice*:This email may contain
> confidential information, is subject to
> legal privilege, and is intended for the
> use of the named addressee only. If you
> are not the intended recipient, you must
> not use, disclose or copy any part of this
> email. If you have received this email by
> mistake, please notify the sender and
> delete this message immediately.
> _______________________________________________
> 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://community.internetsociety.org.
> -
> 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://community.internetsociety.org.
> -
> View the Internet Society Code of Conduct:
> https://www.internetsociety.org/become-a-member/code-of-conduct/
>
>
>
> --
> *Caleb Ogundele*
> Email: muyiwacaleb at gmail.com
> _______________________________________________
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://elists.isoc.org/pipermail/chapter-delegates/attachments/20250205/2f19e5c3/attachment-0001.htm>
More information about the Chapter-delegates
mailing list