<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Bill,<br>
<br>
Thanks for the update. If previous status on this initiative
showed up on the main members list, I missed it. There have been
issues where things in e-mail to the list are marked as spam. As
I get the list in digest mode, that means losing a day...<br>
<br>
It would have been a good idea to post those events to this list,
as the team signed up to work on the revisions. It would also be
a good idea to update the website's "a revision is expected"
statement.<br>
<br>
Yes, when the bylaws are revised, they should include language
concerning resignation. The point of bylaws is to reduce the
amount of knowledge that is carried around as folklore, which
tends to prevent issues. And so people know what they're signing
up for. This is consistent with other professional societies.
For example, Article 3 section 3 at
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.acm.org/about/constitution">http://www.acm.org/about/constitution</a>. By the way, the ACM bylaws
are at <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.acm.org/about/bylaws">http://www.acm.org/about/bylaws</a>. Although both documents
are for an organization of greater complexity and scope, they
might be worth reviewing when (if?) the effort is revived.<br>
<br>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">Timothe Litt
ACM Distinguished Engineer
--------------------------
This communication may not represent the ACM or my employer's views,
if any, on the matters discussed.
</pre>
On 01-Apr-15 04:48, William Drake wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:%3C6A477748-68E2-474B-8C20-08A7D6E59120@gmail.com%3E"
type="cite">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
charset=windows-1252">
Hi Timothe
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">As has been mentioned a number of times on the main
members list and at Constituency Day meetings, this initiative
has been on hold for a number of reasons. Two efforts to get a
team going stalled from lack of a facilitator and significant
engagement. I then reach out to several veterans including the
folks who did the last version and said look why don’t we just
take a week and do this, and the view was why bother when what
we’d really like to do is see if we can’t move to the integrated
SG model we advocated at the dawn of NCSG rather than doubling
down on the dysfunctional constituency silo model. So I started
poking around with some board members and asking do you think
it’s conceivable we could ever get the board to accept that, and
got varying responses, some encouraging us to make a proposal
and some saying that’d probably set off a more divisive holy war
do you think it’s worth it. Then the GNSO Review process was
launched, in which context the structures of interest
aggregation in the GNSO will be debated. The initial draft from
the consultant was full of agenda-driven nonsense, which we and
others have pushed back on, and we’re now waiting to see what
the revision will look like. The consultant are to provide this
in late April, and then the community review team will provide
input, there’ll be a public comment period, etc. By the BA
meeting I would hope we will be able to have a more focused
discussion, which together with the pending churn of the Board
Structural Improvements Committee should provide clarity on the
larger picture going forward. If the upshot is that we are
permanently wedded to a system that basically just wastes
peoples’ time and distracts energies from policy work etc, then
I would be happy to try once again to work with whomever is
willing to spend some cycles to redo the Bylaws and align them
with the current realities of the constituency’s role in the SG.
But we’re not there yet, and expending the time now while
things are up in the air and people are swamped with other
items doesn’t seem so sensible. I don’t believe the board is
thinking about this or in a position to act anytime soon with
all else that’s going on in parallel.</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">As to quitting: anyone can quit anytime. It’s a
volunteer association like any civil society network or
professional association, not a penal colony. If someone says
drop me from the membership list, for whatever reason, we drop
them, end of story. This has never been an issue, but if and
when we do a revision I suppose we could put that in writing if
people think it’s helpful.</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">Best</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">Bill</div>
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>