[NCSG-EC] Fwd: Fwd: member applications

[Johan Helsingius]

Dear NCSG-EC members, how are we doing on this?

	Julf



-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject: Fwd: member applications
Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2023 15:28:36 +0100
From: Johan Helsingius <julf at Julf.com>
To: NCSG EC <ncsg-ec at lists.ncsg.is>

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>

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