[NCSG-EC] Fwd: member applications

[Johan Helsingius]

The way I found everything was by going through
https://members.ncsg.is/civicrm/member/search and
then clicking on the link to the organisation.

Going forward, the solution is probably commissioning
a custom report about new applications that includes
all the information.

	Julf

On 15/02/2023 18:26, David Morar wrote:
> Sorry for the additional question, but is there a way for us to get to 
> the place where we can access all the info that wasn't shown to us on 
> the first go-around?
> 
> David Morar, PhD
> @morar <https://twitter.com/morar>
> davidmorar.com <http://davidmorar.com/>
> 
> 
> On Tue, Feb 14, 2023 at 9:28 AM Johan Helsingius via NCSG-EC 
> <ncsg-ec at lists.ncsg.is <mailto:ncsg-ec at lists.ncsg.is>> wrote:
> 
>     Dear NCSG EC,
> 
>     Now that we have discovered that a lot of the membership applications
>     we couldn't approve because they hadn't provided enough information
>     had actually provided the required information, but CiviCRM didn't
>     show it, I have to ask you to go back and look at the new applications
>     you have voted "no" on (as well as the ones you haven't voted on) and
>     reconsider your approval/disapproval. If your answer still is "no",
>     please provide a reason.
> 
>     Especially considering the ICANN mapping inventory of WS2
>     Recommendations 2 and 6 (Good Faith and Accountability) highlighted
>     our lack of a process of appeal when application for membership is
>     rejected. I feel we can only deny applications for two reasons:
> 
>     1) the applicant doesn't satisfy the membership requirements
>          stated in our charter
>     2) you have (possibly confidential) information that indicates
>          the applicant violates our rules and ethical guidelines or
>          is not supporting our goals
> 
>     In the case of confidential reasons, please share them with
>     me (confidentially and privately) by email.
> 
>     Could we please have all applications reviewed and updated
>     a week from now?
> 
>              Julf
> 
> 
>     -------- Forwarded Message --------
>     Subject: member applications
>     Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2023 11:05:33 +0100
>     From: Johan Helsingius <julf at Julf.com>
>     To: NCSG EC <ncsg-ec at lists.ncsg.is <mailto:ncsg-ec at lists.ncsg.is>>
> 
>     Dear NCSG EC,
> 
>     Trying to deal with the embarrassing backlog of membership application
>     approvals, I went through all the pending applications.
> 
>     Seems we have managed to approve (as in all who have commented have
>     given a "yes") all of 6 applications for individual and 3 applications
>     for organizational membership (well, 4 if one counts the somewhat
>     odd-sounding "#DearGovernments Organisation". There are "no" votes
>     on 17 organisations (because they haven't provided statement of interest
>     and/or domain name) and 9 individuals (3 with no reason provided, 3
>     because of not enough information, and 3 because they are not seen as
>     non-commercial).
> 
>     There are 4 individual applications (including one prominent former
>     board member) with no comments or votes, same for 2 organisations
>     that seem to have, according to CiviCRM, applied for membership in
>     NCUC & NPOC, but not NCSG - is that possible?
> 
>     There are 17 new individual and 3 organizational applications
>     since our last EC meeting.
> 
>     How do we proceed? I suggest we consider the 9 with all "yes" votes
>     and the 6 ones with no comments (and thus no "no" votes) approved.
> 
>     For the 17 organisations that haven't provided statement of interest
>     or domain name, I suggest we deny the applications but ask them to
>     resubmit, providing the needed information.
> 
>     For the 9 individuals that have gotten a "no" vote, I would appreciate
>     if you could fill in a valid reason for denying the application. We can
>     as the 3 with not enough information to resubmit with more information,
>     but as for the 3 that are not seen as non-commercial, I would like
>     to understand what the judgement is based on - it is of course OK to
>     say "I have confidential inside information that I can tell in person".
> 
>     Hopefully this would allow us to get rid of the backlog clogging up
>     CiviCRM and get back to a more normal situation.
> 
>     Comments/opinions?
> 
>              Julf
>     _______________________________________________
>     NCSG-EC mailing list
>     NCSG-EC at lists.ncsg.is <mailto:NCSG-EC at lists.ncsg.is>
>     https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-ec
>     <https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-ec>
>