►
Description
Internet Society Board Open Forum on Structures of Consultation
Session 1
24 May 2022 (English)
A
Thanks
everybody
for
joining
sorry
we're
getting
started
a
little
late.
A
technical
issue
on
my
side
here
are
the
housekeeping
roles.
As
you
noted,
when
we
joined
the
zoom,
we
are
asking
you
to
respect
the
code
of
conduct,
there's
also
simultaneously
interpretation
available
in
English,
French
and
Spanish.
There
are
also
closed
captions
available
in
English.
A
If
you
can,
please
format
your
questions
with
your
first
name
in
country,
for
example,
Ted
Portugal
and
feel
free
to
type
your
questions
in
French
or
Spanish.
Those
will
be
translated
and
sent
to
the
chair,
as
you
can
hear
from
the
I
think.
Just
a
moment
ago,
the
session
is
being
recorded
and
a
link
for
future
viewing
will
be
shared
after
the
call
next
slide.
Please.
A
Next
slide,
please
so:
we've
just
gone
through
the
introduction,
we'll
we'll
just
touch
briefly
on
the
working
group,
Charter
constraints
and
some
additional
housekeeping
and
then
we'll
go
to
comments
and
questions
next
slide.
Please,
as
folks
know,
the
the
governance
reform
working
group
was
chartered
with
a
specific
remit,
and
there
were
some
limitations
set
out
and
I
want
to
remind
you
that,
as
a
result,
the
report
and
the
activities
were
somewhat
constrained
and
those
constrained
constraints
included
proposals
that
would
require
relocation
or
dissolution
of
the
internet
Society.
A
It
is
currently
Incorporated
in
the
United
States,
or
consider
proposals
that
would
breach
or
negate
current
legal
relationships
and
agreements
between
the
internet,
society
and
icann,
or
between
the
internet
society
and
the
public
interest
registry,
primarily
for
the
elections
related
one.
We
also
note
that
it
could
not
include
proposals
to
reduce
the
stakeholder
committee
community's
ability
to
choose
candidates
to
serve
on
the
Board
of
Trustees,
since
that's
not
really
the
topic
of
today's
consultation,
perhaps
not
as
important
today.
Next
slide.
Please.
A
B
Thank
you,
Ted
hospital,
detler
and
I
were
co-chairs
of
the
of
the
final
six
months
of
the
of
the
process,
and
there
was
a
great
deal
of
interest
in
the
in
the
working
group
for
a
variety
of
reasons.
We
had
about
a
hundred
and
some
people,
all
together,
posting,
maybe
less
little
less
than
a
hundred.
There
were
thousands
of
posts
and
the
the
opinions
varied
all
over
the
map.
B
The
governance
part
the
sorry,
the
the
part
that
we're
going
to
be
talking
about
today,
not
having
to
do
with
the
diversity
of
the
board
and
and
elections
was.
It
was
a
was
an
interesting
one
and
at
the
beginning
of
the
process,
this
process
started.
Certainly
at
the
end
of
the
of
a
period
in
which
isoc
had
tried
to
negotiate
a
sale
of
PIR.
B
You
may
recall
in
2019
2020,
and
that
point
there
was
a
a
great
concern
for
about
from
the
membership
and
from
others
about
whether
this
was
an
appropriate
thing
to
do,
and
the
some
of
the
dissatisfaction
that
is
was
implicit
in
the
in
the
discussion
came
from
that
the
Michael
Godwin,
who
was
one
of
the
original
co-chairs,
suggested
that
the
this
was
not
a
governance
issue.
Really.
B
This
was
an
issue
of
relationships
between
the
membership
and
and
the
society,
but
if
it
could
be
posted
as
a
governance
issue
to
see
how
far
we
got
with
it,
so
in
the
report-
Hans,
Peter
and
I
characterized
this
this
this
this
process
as
some
a
bit
of
an
alienation
of
the
membership,
primarily
the
chapter
and
the
individual
members
and
the
and
the
staff-
and
we
work
to
try
to
understand
this.
But
it
was.
B
It
was
more
an
issue
of
going
going
through
complaints
and
concerns,
rather
than
having
receiving
any
any
suggestions
for
a
for
for
a
how
should
I
say
a
front
Rupp
Rush
Mall
between
between
the
two.
Now
the
question
is:
how
big
is
this
big
at
all
is
a
similar
of
trust.
Is
this
a
matter
of
governance?
We
don't
know
but
we'd
like
to
hear
the
feelings
of
the
assembled
group
here.
If
you
haven't
read
the
report,
it
should
be
available.
B
B
C
C
Now
it
seems
to
me
you
know.
We
all
know
that
the
board
members
have
did
you
share
abilities
so
they're
constrained,
and
in
this
circumstance
it
appears
that
they
thought
that
it
was
necessary
to
agree
to
this
non-disclosure,
because
that
was
in
the
best
interest
of
the
internet.
Society,
so
I'm
wondering
whether
it
would
help
in
terms
of
transparency.
C
It
may
not
help
in
terms
of
making
Financial
deals,
but
in
terms
of
transparency
and
increasing
trust,
which
has
George
pointed
out
was
one
of
the
issues
that
came
up
would
be
to
actually
add
a
transparency
requirement
in
the
in
the
board.
You
know
if
I
had
I
I'm,
never
going
to
be
a
member
of
the
ice
hog
board,
probably
or
any
other
board
if
I
have
been
I
would
have
said.
C
No,
we
can't
do
that
and
if
they
said
we're
violating
your
future
Duty,
then
I
would
have
just
resigned
and
what
I
mean
is
I
would
not
have
agreed
to
something
that
could
not
be
transparent.
Now,
as
I
recall,
isoc
does
have
sorry.
I
can't
does
have
some
sort
of
transparency
requirement
written
with
bylaws
I'm,
not
sure
how
binding
that
is
or
whatever
but
I
think.
C
Maybe
that's
something
that
could
be
thought
about,
should
I
suck,
add
some
sort
of
strong
transparency
requirement
and
it's
bylaws,
which
would
then
oblige
the
board
members
not
to
enter
into
those
sort
of
non-disclosure
agreements,
with
the
understanding,
of
course,
that
that's
limiting
what
the
board
could
do,
because
it
means
they
couldn't
envisage
the
kind
of
deal
that
was
envisaged
here.
So
that's
kind
of
something
that
I'm
offering
to
Think
Through
thanks.
D
A
I
think
the
the
primary
question
for
the
previous
topic
is
is
obviously
the
board
holds
most
of
its
meetings
in
in
Open
session.
It
records
them
and
makes
them
available,
puts
them
on
YouTube.
All
of
the
parts
of
the
the
functioning
of
the
board
that
can
be
open
are
are
pretty
much
open
now,
when
it's
acting
formally
as
a
board.
A
So
if
there's
a
specific
proposal,
we
can
certainly
take
that
to
our
chief
Council
and
discuss
discuss
it
with
her,
but
as
it
is
now
I
think
the
board
has
taken
on
and
especially
since
Gonzalo
pushed
the
board
to
begin
pushing
things
onto
YouTube
Etc.
The
idea
that
the
community
would
like
us
to
be
as
transparent
as
is
possible.
The
real
question
is:
is
there
a
difference
in
of
opinion
on
what's
possible,
Stephen.
D
Sure,
thanks
yeah,
so
again
it's
slightly
related,
but
a
bit
different
topic.
I
I
tend
to
agree
that
the
boards
agreeing
at
kind
of
confidentiality
mechanism
in
the
this
PIR
proposed
sale
was
an
error.
I
think
the
board
made
a
mistake
in
agreeing
that,
but
aside
from
that,
I
think
I
think
the
boards
should
try
and
establish
mechanisms
for
consultation
for
big
changes
and
also
try
and
Define
what
big
changes
means.
D
I
I'd
be
entirely
happy
if
the
board
figure
out
how
to
parameterize
those
things
I'd
be
entirely
happy
if
the
board
experiment
with
ways
of
Consulting
but
I
do
think
that,
in
the
case
of
something
as
significant
as,
for
example,
the
proposed
PIR
sale
that
should
not
have
been
done
personally.
I,
don't
think
without
some
kind
of
broad
consultation,
even
if
that's
a
barrier
to
to
coding
a
deal
which
it
would
have
been
so
so.
D
It
could
be
surveys,
it
could
be
establishing
a
mailing
list
it
could
be.
Perhaps
you
could
imagine
that
this
governance
working
group
was
an
experiment.
So
you
know
perhaps
the
mechanism
of
setting
up
a
mailing
list
and
having
some
related
discussion
is
a
way
of
Consulting
again
surveys,
all
the
usual
kind
of
things.
D
A
I
see
George's
hand
up
just
a
just
a
quick
clarification.
I
think
I
did
say
earlier,
put
your
hand
up,
I
meant
in
the
tool.
There
are
four
different
screens
of
participants,
so
it's
not
necessarily
the
case
that
you're
on
the
screen
that
we
can
see
or
that
any
other
participant
sees
it
at
this
particular
moment.
So
if
you
do
have
an
a
comment
you'd
like
to
make,
please
raise
your
hand
in
the
zoom
tool
or
type
it
into
the
chat.
My
apologies
for
that
lack
of
clarity
before
George.
B
Thanks
said
well,
I
wanted
to
raise
a
particular
aspect
that
had
been
discussed
in
the
report
and
in
the
discussions
that
had
occurred
and
asked
when
we
look
at
established
methods
of
communication.
Now
between
the
members
and
the
board,
we
have
the
chapters
advisory
committee
and
there's
a
process
for
raising
an
issue
to
the
chapters
advisory
committee
and
there's
a
process
for
the
committee
to
bring
it
to
the
board.
B
It
seems
to
me
somewhat
slow
and
ponderous-
maybe
it
isn't
to
you
and
but
but
is
this
an
effective
mechanism,
because
there
were
opinions
that
were
in
several
different
directions
here,
some
thought
it
was
useless,
others
thought
well,
it
should
be,
it
should
be
improved.
There
should
be
more,
there
should
be
more
openness
in
the
chac.
E
Yes,
Dad,
one
part
of
the
question
was
with
regards
to
a
person
with
disabilities
and
how
the
chapters
and
Boards
ensure
the
part
of
communication.
So
since
we
are
talking
about
communication
and
consultation,
my
suggestion
there
would
be
to
to
send
the
message
across
in
different
formats,
for
instance,
if,
if
the
message
is
being
sent
in
an
English
language,
translation
of
different
languages
would
help
also
sign
language.
E
Interpretation
of
different
videos
would
also
help
as
well
as
description
of
any
images
that
may
come
in
the
in
the
spreading
of
the
messages
would
certainly
be
helpful
for
for
people
with
disabilities,
so
these
are
just
some
of
the
suggestions
to
start
with.
Of
course,
there
is
a
complete
size
of
making
your
messages
and
Communications
and
social
media
platforms,
arms
accessible
for
people
with
disabilities,
the
chapters
and
the
internet
Society
communication
team
can
also
benefit
from
those
tips
and
documents
that
are
already
available
and
produced
by
different
organizations.
E
This
is
one
thing
that
I
wanted
to
say,
of
course,
if
there
are
other
marginalized
marginalized
groups
in
the
societies
other
than
the
people
with
disabilities,
and
certainly
there
would
be
other
advices
and
strategies
to
include
input
from
those
groups
and
I
would
welcome
those
as
well.
Thank
you.
That's
enough.
F
Yes,
just
my
sword
on
the
chapter
advisory
Council
many
years
ago,
20
25
years
ago,
most
of
the
communication
between
members
and
staff
and
the
board
happened
alongside
ietf
meetings.
I
can
meetings
you
just
ran
into
somebody
grabbed
him
took
him
away
and
talked
to
him
as
long
as
you
liked.
Over
the
years
this
became
less
and
less
possible.
So
around
must
be
now
10
years,
11
years,
I'm
not
sure
John
might
have
a
better
collection
about
John
Moore
might
have
a
better
collection
and
he's
on
a
call.
F
To
my
dismay
now,
I
see
that
this
channel
has
been
I
would
say
very
much
formalized
and
it's
not
utilized
anymore
for
free
flow
of
communication.
It's
just
for
yeah,
let's
say
very
big
or
heavy
topics,
so
I
think
well,
I,
believe
or
I
feel
there's
really
a
lack
of
communication,
a
free
flow
of
information
between
staff
board
and
membership,
membership
of
all
clients.
We
have
a
lot
of
consultations
but
below
the
con.
The
official
consultations
about
the
program
about
whatever
there
is
not
enough
communication
flowing
in
both
directions.
A
G
So
I
I
just
want
to
reiterate
what
Hans
Peter
said.
One
of
the
things
I've
had
long
experienced
with
activist
organizations
and
one
of
the
strengths
of
I
of
Isaac
can
be
the
fact
that
has
this
International
Organization
has
individual
chapters
that
are
doing
things,
but
it's
better
just
question
of
how
much
more
integration
can
be
done
and
I
think
the
chapter
advisory
Council
has
begun
it,
but
the
communications
are
not
as
two-way
and
not
as
robust
and
and
I
guess.
G
A
Thank
you
John,
just
reflecting
some
things
from
that
chat
before
we
go
into
Jordy.
The
report
was
circulated
to
the
mailing
list
with
the
subject
line
for
final
report
of
grwg
attached
community
meeting
information.
That
was
in
response
to
a
number
of
people
who
asked
how
they
got
a
copy
of
the
report.
A
A
Andrew
provided
the
mechanism
for
joining
the
governance
reform
working
group.
If
you're
not
already
a
member
and
Siddharth
bami,
asked
the
question.
The
topic
was
structured
on
consultations,
I
believe
do
these
consultations
pertain
to
board
meetings
or
outward
consultations
pertaining
to
Internet,
working
and
policies
in
general
and
given
ice
hock
is
a
501c3.
How
can
these
be
done
with
corporates
in
general?
The
topic
of
this
is
different
mechanisms
or
structures
for
consultation
and
I.
A
Think
the
topic
that
was
just
raised
by
Hans,
Petter
and
John
correctly
concludes
that
this
does
include
how
to
make
sure
that
two-way
communication
is
robust
both
between
the
board
and
the
community
and
among
different
parts
of
the
of
the
community
Flavio
notes.
The
truck
is
not
being
used
to
really
consult
the
chapters
on
more
strategic
issues
or
to
discuss
policy
issues.
Meetings
are
very
sparse
and
handle
mostly
administrative
issues.
A
It
could
be
much
more
effective
would
also
be
useful
to
see
how
well
the
truck
interacts
with
the
Board
of
Trustees
sagarika,
says,
accessible
format
of
websites
and
encouraged
web
developers
to
develop
pages
with
more
access
friendly
contents
was
one
way
of
inclusion.
I
think
this
refers
back
to
the
previous
topic
that
Muhammad
replied
to
Louise
noted
to
Flavio
that
the
track
as
any
eyesight
body
provides
regular
reports
to
the
Board
of
Trustees
secrets.
A
We
are
supposed
to
push
policymakers
to
have
policy
with
persons
with
disability
friendly
web
pages
Andrew,
provided
yet
a
different
method
for
connecting
to
the
the
list.
Luis
asked
or
sorry
Flavio
asked
Louise.
Could
these
regular
reports
from
the
check
the
Board
of
Trustees
speak
conveyed
to
the
chapters
and
Luis
noted
the
reports
are
part
of
the
Open
Session
to
the
Board
of
Trustees
and
therefore
are
available.
H
H
That's
again,
this
should
be
done,
but
in
my
opinion
the
most
important
part
is
that
chapters
do
not
see
diversity,
culture
as
the
proper
communication,
Channel
and
and
I
think
this
is
a
topic
or
issue
we
should
we
should
address.
Also
the
way
the
representative
for
the
chapter
advisory
country
are
elected
is,
in
my
opinion,
does
not
facilitate
the
operation,
for
instance,
every
year
there
are
elections,
and
it
may
happen
that
from
one
year
to
the
next
year,
all
the
members
are
completely
new.
H
Perhaps-
and
this
is
an
idea-
the
the
renewal
of
the
members
should
be
year
every
year,
but
perhaps
not
all
the
members,
so
that
there
is
a
a
continuity,
because
this
is
my
own
experience
when
I
joined
the
the
basically
basically
I
spent
the
full
year
following
and
trying
to
understand
what
were
the
topics
and
they
saw
that
where
I
did
not
expect.
This
should
work
as
it
is
working
so
and
well
by
chance
and
again
this
year
in
the
budget
Council,
but
I
could
not
be
there.
H
A
There
were
a
couple
of
comments
in
the
chat
Stephen
asked.
If
there
was
a
link
to
the
above
reports
again
they're
they're
part
of
the
mailing
list,
you
should
be
able
to
get
it
from
there.
Kevin
provided
a
link
to
a
sample
chat.
Steering
committee
report
to
the
isop
board.
Flavia
replied
to
Elise.
I
was
referring
to
very
sparse
meetings
of
the
chat
with
the
chapters
where
they
could
really
get
the
position
of
the
chapters
on
relevant
issues.
A
B
I'm
thinking
in
the
absence
of
comments
from
the
floor,
I
was
using
the
the
following
that
if
the
chapters
feel
that
they're
not
getting
good
communication
to
the
board
through
the
chac,
how
do
they
get
communication
with
the
board?
Is
it
one
way
two-way?
Is
it
sufficient
if
it's
lacking,
how
is
it
lacking
and
what
does
it
accomplished
or
not
accomplished
foreign.
B
C
A
A
Consultation
and
I
encourage
you
to
review
the
the
minutes
or
the
recordings
for
that
I
believe
you're,
actually
the
first
person
to
to
recommend
sexual
and
gender
minorities,
but
this
topic
has
been
discussed
and
I,
encourage
you
to
to
review
that
discussion
and
and
send
further
comments
if
need
be.
Stephen.
D
Hi
yeah
just
having
had
a
look
at
a
few
of
the
or
well
one
of
those
reports
that
was
mentioned
about
chapter
reports
and
to
the
Board
of
Trustees
that
that
just
a
quick
look
that
looks
like
a
totally
inadequate
method
of
communication.
It's
like
a
cookie
cutter
or
status
slide.
That's
all
I
saw
maybe
this
other
reporting.
It
seems
very
unidirectional
and
in
contrast
to
the
what
I
know,
the
ietf
and
IAB
interactions
that
the
volatile
Caesar
like
it.
It
seems
pretty
sparse
and
not
particularly
useful.
A
Thank
you,
Andrew
notes
and
chat.
I
wonder
whether
the
discussion
about
interaction
between
chapters
and
the
Board
needs
a
statement
about
what
the
goal
of
interacting
with
the
board
is
I'm,
not
sure
what
is
wanted
from
the
board
in
order.
The
issue
has
to
do
with
what
people
think
the
board
is
for
Richard.
C
Yeah,
well,
you
know
Andrew
I'm
sure
you
know
that
the
chac
actually
agreed
advice
regarding
the
sale
of
the
proposed
sale
of
PIR
and
what
that
basically
said
is
well.
First,
it
shouldn't
go
forward,
at
least
not
without
more
information
and
second,
the
chapter
should
have
been
consulted
and
there
should
have
been
greater
transparency.
C
So
what
the
chapters
wanted
in
that
particular
case
is
very
clear
and
I
believe
that
that's
just
one
example
of
a
generic
wish
for
greater
transparency,
which
I
mentioned,
but
that
has
told
us
that
greater
transparency
is
not
possible.
So
that's
the
end
of
the
story.
You
know,
if
that's
what
you
say
that
that's
what
you
say,
but
what
the
chapters
are
asking
for.
I
think
is
about
to
be
clear.
A
Just
to
clarify
what
I
actually
said:
wasn't
the
greater
transparency
wasn't
possible,
but
that
we'd
have
to
see
a
proposal
for
what
the
transparency
was
to
make
sure
that
we
could
deliver
the
fiduciary
duties
required
of
us
in
addition
to
the
transparency,
and
that
means
talking
to
council
about
what
transparency
is
wanted
in
some
cases,
it's
very
clear.
We
cannot
and
some
of
the
executive
sessions
that
the
the
board
holds
are
very
clearly
on
the
advice
of
council
that
we
cannot
make
those
available
to
others.
A
There
are
some
others,
for
example,
the
some
of
the
sessions
with
par
where
a
fiduciary
duty
is
to
ensure
that
PR,
which
is
in
a
competitive
industry,
is
not
revealing
information
to
the
public
that
it
is
not
ready
to
reveal
to
the
public.
So
there
are
conditions
under
which
the
board
occasionally
must
operate.
That
do
require
that
admit,
without
full
transparency
and
Report
instead,
in
summary
and
I,
think,
that's
definitely
going
to
continue
to
be
the
case.
A
C
No
I
just
wanted
to
come
back
quickly
to
clarify
I'm
sorry
I
misunderstood
what
you
said
in
the
beginning.
Yes,
obviously
there
are
things
for
just
one
obvious
example
is
you
know
Personnel
matters?
Obviously
some
things
are
not
going
to
be
totally
transparent,
but
you
know
you
say:
what's
the
proposal
for
transparency?
Well,
you
know
we're
not
the
lawyers,
as
you
correctly
said,
that's
a
matter
for
the
lawyers.
So
what
I'm
saying
is
that
I
believe
the
chapter
is
one
greater
transparency
and
I?
C
Don't
think
it's
fair
to
go
back
to
the
to
put
the
ball
back
on
us
and
say
well
what
exactly
we
want?
It's
up
to
you
to
come
up
and
say:
look!
This
is
what
can
be
achieved
and
I
come
back
and
say
well
and
what,
if
you
put
a
transparency
requirement
in
the
bylaws,
would
that
make
a
difference
or
not?
C
I,
don't
know
I'm,
not
a
lawyer,
but
it's
something
to
explore,
and
it's
not
something
that
you
should
ask
us
to
come
up
with
a
legally
binding
proposal
and
I
saw
Andrew's
post
on
the
on
the
chat,
with
the
effect
that
I
can
has
lots
of
those
videos.
Yes,
of
course
we
do
and,
as
you
say,
some
things
are
always
going
to
be
closed.
That's
not
the
point.
The
point
is,
could
it
be
more
open
and
if
so,
what
needs
to
be
done
and
does
it
need
a
change
in
the
bylaws
I?
A
A
But
my
understanding
of
the
fiduciary
duty
that
they
had
was
one
where
the
commercial
aspects
of
it
did
require
confidentiality
and
that
attempting
to
do
it
without
that
confidentiality
would
have
meant
that
they
might
have
failed
their
fiduciary
duty
that
if
they
are
offered
an
ability
to
serve
the
foundation
and
they
decline
it
in
order
to
to
accomplish
some
other
goal,
that
they
may
not
meet
their
fiduciary
duty.
But.
F
A
I
wasn't
on
the
board
at
the
time,
so
I
can't
really
comment
on
the
on
the
details.
In
the
meantime,
there
are
a
number
of
things
that
have
come
in
in
chat,
so
I
will
try
and
catch
us
up
there
from
winthropu.
There
are
and
should
be
other
channels,
aside
from
chapter
advisory
committee,
there
used
to
be
time
when
we
could
discuss
various
eyesight
matters
with
the
isoc
regional
officer
staff,
but
now
it
seems
that
isoc
has
become
excessively
centralized
in
isoc.
A
Regional
role
seems
to
now
be
issuing
instructions
from
isoc
Central
to
the
chapters
a
one-way
Street,
Earls,
Donaldson
Hira,
says:
I'm
Grassroots,
internet
governance,
Enthusiast
with
strict
adherence
to
the
use
of
Internet
to
document
and
sorry
to
document
and
do
human
rights
advocacy
from
the
Grassroots
community
at
karamoja
and
Uganda.
We
offer
advocacy
of
encryption
and
digital
security
support
from
Battle
Grassroots
human
rights
Defenders
at
risk.
How
can
my
petition
participation
add
up
to
the
board?
A
Asherawad
says
for
Sig.
2
is
the
same
as
chapters
Stephen
Farrell
says
Andrew,
for
what
it's
worth
I
thought
there
was
a
pretty
clear,
disconnect
back
during
the
Pierre
or
sales
Saga
Flavio
says
Andrew.
Could
you
revert
the
question?
Should
the
board
be
interested
in
hearing
what
the
chapters
or
their
leaders
think
about
relevant
issues?
A
Gary
Campbell
says
at
Ted,
I,
agree,
Steven,
says
Proposal
with
regard
to
transparency,
don't
sign
any
ndas
as
the
Board
of
Trustees
Louise
says
at
escherod,
six
are
largely
similar
to
Chapters.
However,
there
is
no
check
exclusively
equivalent
to
sigs.
If
this
answers
your
question,
Andrew
Flavio
sure
also
of
interest.
But
what
does
one
want?
A
The
effect
of
that
interaction
between
chapters
and
a
board
supposed
to
be
sorry,
unfortunately
changed
syntax
part
of
the
way
through
then
he
says
by
the
way,
on
the
subject
of
chapters
we
just
received
today,
a
request
to
sign
a
new
letter
of
agreement
with
isoc,
where
the
purpose
of
the
chapter
is
defined,
as
the
purpose
of
the
chapter
shall
be
to
support
the
internet.
Society's
vision,
mission
and
operating
principles
in
the
territory
I
might
have
missed
the
discussion
on
that
subject.
Was
there
one,
and
could
we
look
into
some
transcripts
notes?
A
Bulgaria,
Stephen,
Farrell
says
I
think
that
interpretation
of
the
fiduciary
duty
of
the
board
at
that
time
is
something
that
could
be
debated.
There
are
reasonable
arguments
both
ways.
Siva
subramanian
says
it
could
be
a
plain
board
or
a
tabbed
board,
including
a
tab
for
other
issues,
miscellaneous
issues
or
suggestions,
a
wish
list,
or
anything
otherwise,
not
grouped
or
foreseen,
I
sure.
Well,
it
says
at
Lewis
we
do
have
elected
AMS
officer
and
track
Representatives,
but
the
roles
seem
to
be
very
limited
and
Benny
says
by
the
way.
A
Ted
such
a
quick
reading
is
probably
causing
the
interpreters
to
lose
some
error.
I
apologize,
I,
I,
I
apologize
for
any
hair
lost,
Andrew
says
to
Veni.
The
changes
to
the
chapter
engagement
letter
was
as
I
understand.
It
discussed
pretty
extensively
prior
to
the
changes
to
it
that
took
effect
in
2018
winthropube
plus
one's
feni
and
Flavio
says
one
of
the
effects
of
the
interaction
between
chapters
and
the
board
should
be
that
the
chapters
feel
they
are
being
heard
as
part
of
isoc
help.
Shame
shape
the
main
programs
and
positions.
A
Current
interaction
is
very
weak
Ted.
Can
you
please
elaborate
how
a
non-profit
error
can
operate
in
a
competitive
market?
Is
it
supposed
to
maximize
profit,
or
is
it
supposed
to
best
serve
the
interest
of
its
constituency?
Then
he
says
Andrew.
This
letter
is
replacing
the
one
from
2018.
So
not
sure
there
are
any
differences.
I
haven't
had
the
chance
to
compare,
and
there
is
no
note
which
tells
us
that
the
chapters
are
Stephen
says
regarding
fiduciary
DD
and
the
Pierre
sale.
I
agree
in
my
opinion.
A
A
Boards,
which
use
ranking
and
voting
algorithms
to
determine
how
important
something
is
reddit
is:
is
one
such
and
the
upvotes
and
downvotes
in
that
help
determine
what
the
vast
mass
of
the
society
or
a
particular
subreddit
are,
are
interested
in
and
we
could
Implement
something
that
had
that
kind
of
characteristic.
But
I'll
warn
you
that
there
are
obvious
and
and
severe
side
effects
to
that.
A
That
turns
it
from
one
kind
of
scaling
problem
into
another
kind
of
scaling,
problem
and
I
think
we
have
to
be
very
careful
in
understanding
to
go
back
to
a
point
Andrew
made
some
time
ago.
What
is
it
we're
attempting
to
do
with
with
this
communication
and
I?
Think
the
biggest
answer
here
goes
back
to
the
mission,
we're
trying
to
find
the
points
at
which
the
society
as
a
whole
wants
to
deliver
its
Mission
across
the
different
parts
of
the
society.
A
Each
chapter
is
independent,
both
of
itself
and
of
isoc,
but
we
all
ascribe
to
the
same
Mission,
as
does
the
omac
and,
as
does
the
work
of
the
iitf,
we're
all
trying
to
make
the
internet
for
everyone
we're
all
trying
to
make
it
stronger,
more
successful
and
and
more
extensive
and
I
think
we.
We
have
to
try
and
figure
out
what
it
is
about.
A
Our
communication
that
bubbles
up
to
the
top
those
things
which
actually
help
us
deliver
the
mission,
because
there
certainly
are
administrative
issues
or
other
things
which
are
critically
important
to
a
small
group
of
people
for
some
period
of
time
and
accomplishing
their
their
work
to
deliver
that
mission.
But
possibly
don't
need
that
horizontal
scaling,
property
and
I
think
part
of
what
we're
struggling
with.
Certainly
as
a
board.
I
could
spend
every
single
moment
of
my
time
talking
to
members
of
society,
because
there
are
86
000
of
them.
A
So
we
have
to
work
on
what
the
scaling
properties
of
this
community
is,
and
the
scaling
that
we've
used
in
the
past
is
has
historically
been
by
creating
work
organizations
like
the
chapter
advisory
committee
or
omac,
which
can
spend
time
with
subgroups
of
the
of
the
society
to
bring
their
issues
forward
or
to
take
issues
across
the
society.
Those
may
not
be
the
right
scaling
properties
anymore,
and
it's
certainly
the
case
that
having
these
open
forums
is
useful,
but
it
also
has
a
real
scaling
problem.
A
Are
they
meant
to
help
the
board
make
decisions?
Are
they
meant
to
help
different
parts
of
the
society,
cooperate
on
specific
projects
or
specific
policy
questions
and
understanding
that
set
of
issues
a
little
bit
better
may
help
us
make
sure
that
the
structures
that
we
create
actually
serve
both
the
society
and
the
mission
a
little
bit
better
and
Muhammad
I
see
your
hand.
E
Yes,
thank
you
Ted.
This
is
a
very
critical
question
that
how
do
the
board,
or
one
as
a
board,
member
or
the
book
or
as
a
board
collectively
listens
to
every
member
of
the
society
and,
as
Ted
said,
that
it
is
not
possible
for
the
board
to
listen
to
each
and
every
86
000
of
the
members
of
the
internet.
Society
they
are
also.
They
are,
are
important
for
us,
but
practically
and
humanly
it's
not
possible.
E
There
is
a
check
for
organizations,
there
is
Omak
and
then
the
there
is
the
iepf
processes.
Then
we
I
also
see
problems
within
these
structures.
Chapters
and
individual
members
feel
that
chsc
is
not
adequately
representing
their
concerns
at
the
board,
but
at
the
same
time,
my
last
one
year,
experience
at
the
board
I
feel
that
Omak
is
also
lacking
in
in
reflecting
the
issues
of
the
organizations
at
the
round
table.
E
There
have
been
very
less
participation
from
the
organization
members
and
also
due
to
the
many
reasons
there,
the
chapter
representatives
and
the
chapters
they
their
participation
at
the
chsc
meetings
have
been
and
their
interests
have
been
very
low.
So
we
need
to
improve
these
structures
and
find
a
way
to
to
send
our
input
and
when
I
say
our
I
mean
the
community
input
to
the
board
that
reflects
the
concerns
of
the
community.
This
is
one
question.
A
Flavio
says
Consulting
with
80
000
members
may
be
very
complex,
but
a
large
part
of
those
members
are
also
a
chapter
or
Sig
members,
interacting
with
chapters
and
six
should
be
much
easier.
I
think
one
of
the
questions
that
was
just
raised
is
the
question
of
whether
that
has
been
appropriate
when
it's
going
through
the
chapter
advisory,
Council
or
whether
it
needs
to
go
directly
to
sigs
and
chapters
rather
than
through
the
chapter
advisory.
Council
chapters
and
sigs
are
supposed
to
represent
the
views
of
the
remember
and
I.
A
Don't
think
anybody
questions
that
it's
just
whether
that
advise
whether
that
channel
Communications
channel
is
wide
enough.
Stephen
Farrell
reiterates
what
he
said
at
the
start.
Do
experiments
on
how
to
consult
again.
We
welcome
any
thoughts
on
what
those
experiments
should
be
see.
The
subramanian
says
it
need
not
be
a
70
millimeter
screen
of
issues
visible
to
all
chapters
but
visible
to
trustees
and
Senior
staff.
One
who
posts
issues
may
not
see
what
others
have
I
I
think
this
goes
back
to
his
point
earlier
about
the
the
idea
of
a
bulletin
board.
A
Benny
asks
how
many
board
trustees
are
on
the
call
I
actually
haven't
counted.
How
many
were
on
the
previous
one?
Let's
see
if
they're
showing
interest-
and
this
could
be
giving
some
ideas
of
the
lack
of
participation
is
across
the
organization,
including
the
Board
of
Trustees
or
just
among
members.
A
Fred
and
Andrew
were
talking.
Benny
are
talking
through
okay,
so
I've
tried
to
capture.
What's
in
the
there,
they
didn't
seem
to
be
crosstalk
between
specific
individuals
and
I.
Think
one
of
the
biggest
questions
that
we
will
continue
to
to
to
look
for
guidance
from
the
community
on
is,
if
we
are
going
to
experiment
with
this
I
think
it'd
be
most
successful
to
have
success,
experiments
that
didn't
require
changes
in
structures
right
away.
A
So
it
may
be
that
those
experiments
would
guide
us
at
some
future
point
to
changing
structures,
but
I
think
what
would
be
very
valuable
for
us
is.
If
you
have
ideas
on
what
specific
experiments
we
could
run
for
different
types
of
consultations,
it
would
be
useful
and
whether
what
the
goal
is
is
it
is
a
communication
with
the
board.
A
Andrew
answers
the
question
on
how
many
trustees
are
on
this
goal.
According
to
my
account,
there
are
eight
current
or
incoming
trustees
in
this
goal.
Just
just
as
a
reminder.
We
are
having
two
different
ones
of
these
in
order
to
account
for
different
time
zones.
So
it
may
be
that
some
trustees
could
only
make
the
the
later
of
these
consultations.
That
certainly
would
reflect
what
happened
in
the
first
pair,
so
as
we're
kind
of
coming
on
to
the
top
of
the
hour.