Message-Id: <6.1.2.0.2.20050207170828.030c7eb0@pop.online.fr>
Date: Mon, 07 Feb 2005 17:09:05 +0100
To: Ole Jacobsen <ole@cisco.com>, Sam Hartman <hartmans-ietf@mit.edu>
From: Jefsey Morfin <jefsey@online.fr>
Subject: Re: some pending IASA issues
Cc: "JFC (Jefsey) Morfin" <jefsey@jefsey.com>,
	Harald Tveit Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.HPX.4.58.0502061229410.8169@wells.cisco.com>
References: <6.1.2.0.2.20050129115602.0378ccd0@mail.utel.net>
 <13E6CD5B306CC5277F2047BB@B50854F0A9192E8EC6CDA126>
 <6.1.2.0.2.20050203000708.0689eeb0@mail.jefsey.com>
 <tsld5vdpk1u.fsf@cz.mit.edu>
 <Pine.HPX.4.58.0502061229410.8169@wells.cisco.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed

At 21:36 06/02/2005, Ole Jacobsen wrote:
>Sam,
>I completely agree. While it may be "politically correct" to involve the
>ISOC chapters, it should not be a required course of action. It is also
>worth noting that only a SMALL number of ISOC chapters are actually
>active, have regular meetins, or even a web or e-mail presence. The
>chapter model was adopted to allow global reach, but in a world where
>people have little time for face-to-face meetings and conduct most of
>their business "on line," this hasn't proved to be a very useful model.
>
>There ARE a few exceptions, don't get me wrong, but they number maybe a
>dozen or less chapters on a world-wide basis, with less than 100 people
>involved by my guesstimate.

Each or global?
jfc