Community Meetings

01:09:33 Keith Nelson: Can I heckle in chat?
01:10:55 Kara Schoonveld – SBT Community Manager: The website: https://www.nsitsp.org
01:13:29 Keith Nelson: Why is Eric Hanson here if we are doing respect?
01:14:51 Kara Schoonveld – SBT Community Manager: Join the list: https://www.nsitsp.org/join/
01:15:19 Jesse Courchaine: Thanks Kara you beat me to it.
01:15:39 Kara Schoonveld – SBT Community Manager: 🙂 Good lookin’ out, Jesse!
01:16:26 Kara Schoonveld – SBT Community Manager: Link to Forums: https://www.nsitsp.org/forums/forum/main-forum/
01:17:53 Dave Sobel: I resemble that remark.
01:18:22 Keith Nelson: I do have time and lobby experience as well as have written most of the curriculum for the Community College and UC system certifications and degree classes (which are being used in some legislative concepts). If I am not too offensive I will throw my hat in
01:19:00 Ben Filippelli: My marketing director is a former content writer for political campaigns and lobbying groups, she might be able to help us in some fashion
01:19:42 Keith Nelson: I also have media experience in crisis – 12/2 terrorist attack in SB – JPL/NASA Mars Lander – spokesman for 2 school shootings
01:19:53 Jeff Grenier: We will help in Ohio Karl
01:20:24 Rayanne Buchianico: I registered the domain: fsitsp.org for Florida
01:20:25 Jon Bova: I’m in New Jersey and happy to volunteer to some degree.
01:21:34 Lynn Thames: In Pennsylvania here. Willing to help.
01:22:36 Jesse Courchaine: Clickable 😉 https://www.ncsl.org/research/ethics/50-state-chart-lobbyist-report-requirements.aspx
01:22:43 Tom Wie: Just information: there is a difference between registering an entity as a domain and registering it as a business entity (corporation, LLC, etc.) Also, consideration may need to be given to trademark and service marks ….as we would not be seeking to infringe.
01:23:03 Kara Schoonveld – SBT Community Manager: Volunteers/leaders – please add your name and location here. https://www.nsitsp.org/forums/discussion/volunteer-to-be-a-leader/
01:23:34 Joshua Chamness: Would it maybe be better organized if you do sub-domains for each state against the nsitsp.org domain?
01:23:42 Kara Schoonveld – SBT Community Manager: If you have particular skillsets (@Keith Nelson, Ben Filippelli, etc), add those details too
01:23:46 Colm O Brogain: https://lobbycanada.gc.ca/en/rules/the-lobbying-act
01:24:40 Eric Hanson: 501c6 is the right code
01:25:00 bill hagara: Hostname (“sub-domain”) added to the national domain name is an interesting idea. WI.NSITSP.ORG
01:25:05 Ray Orsini: A 501 C (6) organization is tax speak for a business association such as a chamber of commerce. Although they’re organized to promote business, they don’t generate a profit and don’t pay shares or dividends. That qualifies them as non-profit organizations, exempt from paying income tax.
01:25:12 Daniel Priest: back in the 90’s a Microsoft employee started a 501c3 to centralize efforts in the industry to standardize directx. Microsoft, intel and other industry heavy weights
01:25:20 Daniel Priest: contributed.
01:25:42 Keith Nelson: We should make the membership fee include a component for PAC or political activity
01:26:14 Traci Leffner: I agree with Keith, we should charge a membership fee
01:26:40 Timothy M Golden Golden: No paid. Not till actually justified
01:26:42 Maria Foss: Do we have a defined mission statement and vision defined
01:26:54 Traci Leffner: We should have that paid at the state meeting level and then a portion gets sent to the overall organization
01:27:18 Maria Foss: To have a fee, there needs to be a defined use of the funds
01:27:21 Timothy M Golden Golden: With clear define of what the fee is and what ir covers and where the $ is going.
01:27:26 Kim Leiby: I agree with Larry.
01:27:26 Alex Farling: There will be differing opinions on legislation, etc… Do we have a non-voting zero dollar fee and a paid fee for members who vote on standards of legislation?
01:27:54 Maria Foss: I like Alex’s point
01:28:05 Timothy M Golden Golden: Ask for $ when it’s actually needed and define what that $ goes to/for
01:28:23 Jim Bachaud: Go look at the AICPA – THEY OWN SOC II. This organization has a great model there to follow.
01:28:30 Timothy M Golden Golden: Otherwise how is it any diff then what the CMMC ab is doing by taking $
01:28:45 Maria Foss: good point Timothy
01:28:59 Ken Shafer: Spot on Timothy!
01:29:28 Timothy M Golden Golden: I’m totally FINE paying $ If we knew what it was earmarked for
01:29:49 Timothy M Golden Golden: Otherwise it’s like BNI?
01:29:50 Ken Shafer: Fees can be raised later once there is a definite plan in place to manage and direct spending of the finances.
01:30:01 Alex Farling: I think it’s too early to be earmarking money at this point. But there will be fees for even little things like creating a 501(c)_
01:30:02 Timothy M Golden Golden: Agreed Ken S
01:30:40 Timothy M Golden Golden: Sure alex then define the plan. What $ is needed and who and where that $ goes
01:30:59 Ken Shafer: Anyone who wants to “donate” any amount of money would certainly be welcome to.
01:31:09 Maria Foss: How much money is needed to start a PAC?
01:32:33 Maria Foss: We need to define the fund earmarks and people will support
01:32:33 Jesse Courchaine: I agree at least two tiers, one cheap but not free and one providing additional commitment
01:32:46 Keith Nelson: We are covered now – the two smartest men in the channel are here Alex Farling and Ray Orsini – if Tony F logs on we are complete.
01:32:49 Maria Foss: we need the vision and mission statement and ethical value set. Agreed!!
01:33:35 Keith Nelson: As far as Ethics – I am the Chair of the Ethics Review Board for my City – I wrote the charter document to the State so I understand Ethics
01:33:38 Timothy M Golden Golden: Right keith n
01:34:40 Keith Nelson: No grey here
01:34:46 Alex Farling: Hair?……………
01:34:55 Ray Orsini: the grey is lost in the white hair lol
01:35:33 Alex Farling: “Never let a good disaster go to waste” (on either side)
01:37:00 Andrew Crawford: do you have a link to that site?
01:37:01 Timothy M Golden Golden: We used them https://termageddon.com/ great stuff
01:37:36 Ray Orsini: <3 Keith
01:38:37 Timothy M Golden Golden: Yep. Insurance is one way
01:38:47 Erik Dreyer-Goldman: We can all cryptomine together to raise money!
01:38:56 Ray Orsini: lol
01:39:04 Timothy M Golden Golden: Haha erik
01:39:06 Larry Mandelberg: Ethics is one of my core skill sets. I worked with the national ethics committee of the Institute of Management Consultant-USA (IMC) to create their ethics re-certification process. One ethics related issue is that there are at least 5 broadly recognized ethical philosophies. We have to gain clarity as to which we want to model. e.g., Kantian, Judaic, etc. There are many.
01:39:13 Timothy M Golden Golden: Insurance has the risk
01:39:26 Alex Farling: @Erik – point that Brave browser at nsitsp.org
01:40:09 Ben Filippelli: we just doing this now, talking to all clients to see if they ‘meet’ their cyberinsurance needs
01:40:16 Larry Mandelberg: We should strongly consider collaborating with HISCOX. They might be an outstanding partner. They are one of the largest, personal professional liability providers and great too work with.
01:41:11 David Szpunar: Austraila and/or the UK has an Essential 8 cyber security requirements that they’re pushing on small businesses and then MSPs can get certified to help businesses comply (for a fee), but it’s a requirement that businesses do something. Not sure that would apply here but it’s an interesting concept.
01:41:59 Timothy M Golden Golden: Thanks ray spot on
01:42:22 Eric Anthony: Agreed Ray
01:42:26 Traci Leffner: Thanks Ray for the insight, spot on
01:43:06 Larry Mandelberg: I probably agree depending on how you define a vendor. This relates to the fee issue. What categories of membership do we NEED?
01:43:40 John Rutkowski – BOLDER Designs: Here’s my build on Base Standard Cyber Security http://BusinessSecurityScore.com
01:44:10 Timothy M Golden Golden: A) so we need $ – agreed B) higher tiered for vendors/etc – great. C) look to insurance as a possiable avaneu
01:44:17 Ray Orsini: I would say Free = joined and part of the discussion Paid MSP = above + voting rights, eligible to sit on any board or committee MSP Vendor = above + voting rights, eligible to sit on any board or committee
01:44:35 george monroy: No Trunk Slammers allowed. Understood.
01:44:47 Colm O Brogain: good point Keith
01:44:53 David Phillips: Keith GREAT POINTS
01:44:53 Timothy M Golden Golden: But let’s take into consideration Pay for Play!
01:45:11 Ben Filippelli: @Keith yes I agree , if we can provide carriers with minimizing their risk, it also gets rid of the ‘non-msp’ msps
01:45:19 Ben Filippelli: because they cant accomplish the tasks required
01:45:22 Timothy M Golden Golden: Hence the need for education from US
01:46:17 Ben Filippelli: but ALSO the insurers already have lobbying and influence, so by teaming and influencing them they can push those things because its in their best interest which is also in OUR best interest
01:46:42 Jeff Adzima: Seems to me the vendors are the ones that really need to be legislated & at the end of the day, they have all the $
01:48:21 Van C Nicholson: Sonny lowe, not a pretty picture
01:48:38 Timothy M Golden Golden: Blanket legislation. Ugg
01:48:52 Rayanne Buchianico: These are the topics that have been mentioned so far: Insurance Liability Ethics/Standards Political / Legislation Education Corporate Structure Membership Committee
01:49:05 Rayanne Buchianico: I recommend that this organizational meeting begins with setting up committees where each person can volunteer in the areas where they have expertise and interest.
01:49:05 Ray Orsini: Thank you for that Rayanne
01:49:38 Denis Wilson: I would like to see a set of prioritized tasks that need volunteers to be outlined. For instance we need to have a board BEFORE we can accept money or fees. If we can do that today, that would be great.
01:50:01 David Phillips: Thank you Rayanne
01:50:09 John Rutkowski – BOLDER Designs: Education is tough, when I started is was MIS. And so many college courses are obsolete the day they are offered.
01:50:11 Maria Foss: Agreed, we are in the weeks.
01:50:29 Alex Farling: vendor management = TPRM (Third Party Risk Management) ::: not just calling Comcast when the internet is down…
01:51:11 Maria Foss: So let’s start with the committees Rayanne Suggested
01:52:00 Ken Shafer: Rayanne and Denis – YES! YES! YES! Focus. Focus. Focus.
01:52:01 Timothy M Golden Golden: So..as we start to get into the weeds
01:52:07 Maria Foss: We need the committees defined and a deliverable to bring to the next meeting
01:52:10 Traci Leffner: I agree
01:52:16 Ben Filippelli: why don’t we just relax, focus and succeed!
01:52:24 Timothy M Golden Golden: Let’s focus on setting up some committee
01:52:40 George Burke: Yes Thank you Rayanne 1st point of order
01:52:50 Jim Bachaud: meeting cadence Establish Voting Protocols Qualifications/Categorizations
01:52:58 Timothy M Golden Golden: I nominate Rob Ford structure
01:53:12 Timothy M Golden Golden: I nominate Rob For structure
01:53:37 Traci Leffner: I will help out with whatever is needed
01:54:19 David Szpunar: A Triage Service Board 😀
01:54:20 James Summerlin: Two things we will need to deal with – I don’t think we’ll ever make them go away – but will deal with. First, IT providers that have no formal training and have no idea what they are doing but believe they are totally badass because they can level their world of Warcraft toon up to level 100 in a weekend. Also, customers that will NEVER be compliant because they just don’t care. I have two clients still running Windows Server 2003 and I have a better chance of shaving off keith nelson’s beard through the monitor than getting them to move off 2003.
01:54:30 Timothy M Golden Golden: A) define some committee. B) define a govern body C) get the ‘right’ ppl in each of them groups
01:55:30 Maria Foss: Where will ideas be placed and where should people interested on being on the board make their interest known?
01:55:32 Traci Leffner: I also think the board should meet weekly so a lot of things can be covered before the next overall meeting so we have a better idea of some of these topics!
01:56:08 Maria Foss: The committee lieads should be decided at the same time as the board if they are not part of the board.
01:56:20 Larry Mandelberg: I thnk weekly is WAY too frequent. We can be urgent and frequent to start or launch, and a regular weekly meeting will eclude the smartest, most competent people because they simply won’t have time.
01:56:52 Timothy M Golden Golden: Each committee can decide cadance
01:56:55 Traci Leffner: https://www.nsitsp.org/forums/discussion/volunteer-to-be-a-leader/
01:57:12 Maria Foss: General monthly meeting and the board and committee lieads could meet once in between general meetings
01:58:26 James Summerlin: I would love to be on the forum.
01:58:35 Ray Orsini: https://www.nsitsp.org/forums/discussion/working-group-ideas/
01:58:36 Keith Nelson: Ray O told me I need to be on Reddit to be someone
01:58:43 Ken Shafer: A Month
01:58:47 Kim Leiby: week
01:58:49 Timothy M Golden Golden: There ya go ray!
01:58:58 Maria Foss: what is the agenda for next week ?
01:58:58 Pieter van der Walt: Week
01:59:08 Rich Szymanski: week for now
01:59:10 Maria Foss: What are the goals to be accomplished
01:59:12 Ray Orsini: @Rayanne I tagged you in the thread. Can you please add your thoughts there as well pls
01:59:32 Andrew Crawford: monthly for general membership, bi-monthly for committees
01:59:41 Keith Nelson: I would say in one week we form committees – State Groups and Six Sigma strategies
02:00:00 Larry Mandelberg: Does weekly give participants time to do what needs to be done before the next meeting.
02:00:03 Maria Foss: We should define what will be delivered rather than just say we will meet.
02:00:37 Ben Filippelli: @Larry I think so because we can set some agenda items even if those take a month there is enough other stuff to start on the next week while members are working on last weeks items
02:01:05 Ben Filippelli: transparency is key
02:01:19 James Summerlin: i’m good with weekly
02:01:28 Timothy M Golden Golden: I can’t see cuz of ya know. Transparency.
02:01:33 John Rutkowski – BOLDER Designs: I have to leave for another call. Good start, get it rolling.
02:01:36 Ben Filippelli: hehe
02:01:44 Ray Orsini: https://www.nsitsp.org/forums/discussion/meeting-notes-7-21-2021/
02:01:50 Ray Orsini: @Rayanee
02:01:56 Denis Wilson: Yes, I agree with Keith.
02:01:56 Timothy M Golden Golden: Yaya another weekly meeting 😉
02:01:57 Jesse Courchaine: You rock, Ray
02:02:04 Ray Orsini: <3
02:02:09 Timothy M Golden Golden: Thanks ray! Keyboard warrior
02:02:30 Timothy M Golden Golden: Hard/PITA to multi task on phone 😉
02:03:09 Timothy M Golden Golden: Also NOTE. All the email notifications from the site are going into spam/junk 😉
02:03:53 Jeff Grenier: Alex – 100%!
02:03:54 Maria Foss: Is there a Forum where we can add out interest in being part of a committee?
02:04:06 Erik Dreyer-Goldman: And There’s lots of small shops
02:04:17 Timothy M Golden Golden: Maria, scroll up
02:04:19 Alex Farling: Small shops grow… they need to mature along the way
02:04:33 Erik Dreyer-Goldman: agreed – the goal is to scale.
02:04:34 Jeff Grenier: Erik – The small shops can still charge and do it the right way and stay in the game.
02:04:35 Ray Orsini: @maria use the leader thread https://www.nsitsp.org/forums/discussion/volunteer-to-be-a-leader/ or the committee thread https://www.nsitsp.org/forums/discussion/working-group-ideas/
02:04:43 Jesse Courchaine: https://www.nsitsp.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/Transformation_Industry_to_Profession_Palachuk.pdf
02:04:45 Timothy M Golden Golden: 10q ray
02:04:50 Jeff Grenier: Its the ones that cut corners that are the concern.
02:05:02 Alex Kirilin: Good point Tony, we need our own standards, not coming down from suits
02:05:28 george monroy: What is wrong with wearing a suit? =P
02:05:38 Ben Filippelli: suits for all!
02:06:15 Andrew Crawford: similar to the CPA professional society
02:06:24 Timothy M Golden Golden: @ben have you seen me in a suite! Heck’s no
02:06:24 Jesse Courchaine: Suit Filter for Zoom?
02:06:38 Ray Orsini: i’d pay for that
02:06:48 Alex Farling: Agreed – Ray!
02:06:49 Ben Filippelli: @tim I cant see you because of transparency
02:06:58 Timothy M Golden Golden: Oh right!
02:07:00 Ben Filippelli: 🙂
02:07:06 Ray Orsini: I need to jump but I’m excited for what this turns into and how it can affect our industry. Thanks everyone!
02:07:31 Alex Farling: “passionate”… yes, I know I’m an ass 😉
02:07:38 Jason Slagle: We need vendors to stop enabling the typical 3 tier pricing and tools to solve knowledge.
02:07:40 Larry Mandelberg: Money should NOT be ANY criteria for participation or membership pon the Board.
02:07:41 Alex Kirilin: Kayseya was a “standard” for many
02:07:42 Timothy M Golden Golden: We know @alex
02:07:44 Ben Filippelli: and in reality its not usually MSP its our vendors
02:08:03 Maria Foss: I have to drop, I look forward to the next meeting and information on committee participation. I put my name in the meeting minutes forum, I hope that was the right place
02:08:25 Jeff Adzima: @ Ben right?!?! I’ll say it again, it seems to me that the vendors need to be legislated!!
02:08:28 Alex Farling: Have to drop. Will hit up the forums this afternoon – let’s make sure we post the plan for the next meeting there…
02:08:41 Jon Bova: I agree with having standards. I myself am a small MSP. My only worry is making reaching a proposed standard out of reach for the smaller MSP’s out there.
02:08:43 Maria Foss: Agreed Alex!
02:08:53 Pieter van der Walt: Have to leave for another meeting. Looking forward to hear what the next steps will be.
02:08:55 Jason Slagle: Buy in pricing needs to be structured by something like endpoint count.
02:09:01 Jason Slagle: WISPA is a good model to look at
02:09:05 Ben Filippelli: yeah, this is tantamount to blaming the car dealer for ford cars catching fire
02:09:11 gloria burt: Full inclusion is a great idea.
02:10:12 Timothy M Golden Golden: Thanks for pulling this together
02:10:22 Erik Dreyer-Goldman: Vendors like Microsoft should only sell through partners and not compete with us
02:10:43 Jesse Courchaine: I could see this being a vehicle for pushing back on vendors for taking responsibility
02:11:51 Timothy M Golden Golden: There will alway be “bad” clients. We can choose to work with them or not, this “plan/pac/group” is a starting point to help change the culture. Which will take time!
02:11:56 gloria burt: Thanks Jason. that is a really good point.
02:12:00 Jon Bova: Pizza Tech lol
02:12:07 David Szpunar: I mean HIPAA fixed all the doctors and dentists and required security across the board and we see that now, right? 😀
02:12:46 Jeff Adzima: How about an organization that pushes for legislative action for Vendor accountability
02:12:55 Joshua Chamness: Great point @jslagle!!!
02:13:02 James Summerlin: David, no, we did not see that.
02:13:04 Ben Filippelli: thanks all have to jump for another call
02:13:19 Denis Wilson: Thje same day and time works for me.
02:13:21 Keith Nelson: Thank you all
02:13:24 Timothy M Golden Golden: Please set a regular timer/date
02:13:28 Eric Long: Thanks Karl
02:13:31 Chip Reaves: Thanks Karl and everyone!
02:13:32 Erik Dreyer-Goldman: Thanks Everyone
02:13:32 Colm O Brogain: Thanks Karl
02:13:32 David Szpunar: Thanks Karl and everyone!
02:13:36 George Burke: Thank You Karl and Everyone
02:13:36 Kim Leiby: thank you!
02:13:37 Timothy M Golden Golden: Thanks
02:13:38 Chris Alton: Thank you!
02:13:39 Hagop Belekdanian: thanks
02:13:39 Jon Bova: Thanks Karl and everyone.
02:13:39 Cal Nairne: Thank you
02:13:39 Jesse Courchaine: Good meeting

All links open in a new tab. Listed in the order they were added in the chat.

• Join NSITSP
• Forums
• 50 State Chart: Lobbyist Activity Report Requirements
• Volunteer as a leader
• Canada – Lobbying Act
• Termageddon for Privacy Policy
• Forum – Working Group Ideas
• Forum – Meeting Notes
• Transformation from an Industry to a Profession

01:08:06 Carl Katz: FYI Paul LOVE the Foo Fighters!
01:09:06 Community Concierge: Draft Code of Ethics: https://www.nsitsp.org/about/
01:10:41 Jim Bachaud: https://www.nsitsp.org/join/
01:11:53 Ted Giesler: Just like lawyers, accounts, etc.
01:12:04 Ron Cotsopoulos: Agree with Kar on that
01:12:04 Alex Farling: Isn’t continuing education kind of the definition of technology?
01:12:46 Amy Babinchak: there is nothing wrong with amateurs but the client should know that they are making the decision to hire one
01:14:01 Alex Farling: Disagreement is healthy… It spurs conversation…
01:14:28 Rayanne Buchianico: https://bit.ly/ns-committee
01:16:49 Eric Long: Have committees been defined?
01:17:22 Eric Hanson: See the form. He is asking for suggestions
01:17:31 Lisa Marie Papp: Wednesdays afternoon, this time works great for me however I’ll adjust accordingly
01:17:44 Amy Babinchak: Not entirely, the fiorm is asking for input. Natually there will be one for each state
01:17:46 Eric Long: Got it
01:19:30 Felicia King: Depending on what is offered, this could be a service similar to IANS, but tailored to the MSP industry and not expensive like IANS. IANS is designed for enterprise alone.
01:19:42 Eric Long: Rayanne for Finance Chair 🙂
01:20:05 Lisa Marie Papp: Eric Long, I agree on Rayanne
01:20:18 Felicia King: I would like to see meetings on Fridays as there are already tons of conflicts mid-day during the week every week.
01:21:31 Bob Coppedge: So I’ve read a bit on this. My question is whether this is going to be limited/focused to professionals who provide IT services to companies, or MSPs or including people who are internal IT pros?
01:21:47 Tim Golden: As for meeting date/times each committee can/should define their pace/cadance
01:22:27 Tim Golden: Establish committees, chairs then let the chair define the pace/cadance
01:22:49 Ted Giesler: Agree with Tim.
01:23:08 Denis Wilson: I also Tim
01:23:47 Tim Golden: @karl what tangible costs are currently incurred? Is there an immediate need for $ and where
01:24:25 Michael Menefee: How do we get involved in the building of the structure of the different committee’s? and agenda for future meetings.
01:25:04 Ted Giesler: Does anyone know of any pending state laws affecting the industry?
01:25:28 Michael Menefee: How will this differ from the other associations that are already formed?
01:25:32 Felicia King: subdomains are a good idea
01:25:41 Rayanne Buchianico: Ted, I get daily updates regarding Cyber regulations. I’m happy to share them.
01:25:54 Luke Popejoy: How important is it that every state have a separate org?
01:26:19 Tim Golden: @michale 1. Define committee 2. Each then elect/assign a chair 3. Then define your MGO (mission goals objectives) 4. Map out a plan for MGO
01:26:33 Niels Petersen: We should start central, and we can move to specific states if there is enough going on there.
01:26:49 Michael Menefee: Thanks TIm
01:26:59 Ted Giesler: I suspect that any regulations would be on a state level. Therefore it makes sense to have a state level organizational structure.
01:27:27 Alan Miller: C6 may be more likely than c3
01:27:35 Tim Golden: 1st big step is define the Board, let them begin defining the overall MGOs
01:28:08 Tim Golden: Part of that should include input from each defined committee
01:28:41 Carl Katz: I’m Canadian – how would we in Canada fit in to this? I’m happy to part of the national org.
01:29:21 Ken Shafer: Action steps for all of us attending today: 1. Complete the form at https://bit.ly/ns-committee 2. ??? 3. ???
01:29:56 Andrew Crawford: I think the state level should not be loose, don’t let the focus become diluted by others. Use the model of other organizations like real estate, strong national and goals and visions are set by the lead org.
01:31:02 Ted Giesler: I agree with the MGO being set by the national organization, but it should bubble up from the state level.
01:31:49 Felicia King: One of the committees I recommended was “minimum standards”. If you start with minimum standards, this can drive the educational curriculum.
01:32:06 Andrew Crawford: State Level Legislative Watch feeds back to the national level
01:32:38 Kevin Elsing: What @Felicia said. ^^^^
01:33:34 Felicia King: This needs to be for the MSP industry, not enterprise. Enterprise already has IANS. The needs for the MSP industry are different.
01:33:40 Tim Golden: Some of what we are discussing now (what is a member?) should come from the board and committees
01:33:49 Bo Jakins: I think the AICPA (or similar) would be a good model to help everyone wrap their mind around what this organization is trying to accomplish. Karl – please correct me if I’m wrong. https://www.aicpa.org/membership/benefits.html
01:34:13 Ted Giesler: Is there an initial thought of membership being individuals and/or companies? Maybe 2-tier level like CompTIA?
01:34:40 Michael Menefee: Vendors should be separate.
01:34:46 Steve Roderick: No vote for vendors. They have different priorities.
01:34:53 Tim Golden: Again. All
This chatter be part of the MGO from
The board
01:35:16 Felicia King: Let’s define “vendor” also. One of the challenges with CompTIA is “vendors”. Some MSSPs are “vendors”. On the other hand, a software company like SentinelOne is also a “vendor”.
01:35:26 Chip Reaves: Speaking as a vendor (and former MSP), I think there’s a role for vendors to support & fund but I agree with Steve, no vote for vendors.
01:35:34 Tim Golden: These “in the weeds” chatter is best for the board/steering committee
01:36:04 Ken Shafer: #spoton @Tim
01:36:10 Tim Golden: 🙂
01:36:29 Bob Coppedge: There’s AITP (Association of IT Professionals) which was taken over by CompTIA. They were formally the DPMA (Data Processing Managed Association), which I was involved with back in the 80’s.
01:36:34 Tim Golden: And then seek input from sub commitee
01:36:41 Niels Petersen: that could be a committees, one that focuses on vendors and how they interact.
01:36:46 Felicia King: @Amy, I could not agree more. CompTIA has no value to me due to the manufacturer vendor influence.
01:36:48 Brian Allison: Vendors can be a member of the Advisory Board, but don’t vote/direct the main org.
01:37:00 Patrick Collins: What about a “Vendor’s Council” of some sort. I’ve been a member of something similar with the local Home Builder’s association.
01:37:19 Tim Golden: We are all smart ppl, but when you have 10000’s of voices you have 10000’s of opinions 😉
01:37:34 Luke Popejoy: I agree, vendors could sponsor, but not vote! 🙂
01:38:05 Jason Thomas: MS and many of the larger vendors will drive the conversation just due to the $$ they can provide to make lobbying happen.
01:38:13 Ted Giesler: Agree with Amy
01:38:23 Jay Parisi: That makes sense
01:38:53 Eric Long: I think Lisa just called us old?
01:39:08 Tim Golden: Oh..vendor tiers 😉
01:39:09 Michael Menefee: Vendors are great but they will definitely have a different agenda and will start to steer the org to benefit them.
01:39:25 Ron Cotsopoulos: agreed
01:39:37 Gloria Burt: What about MSP Alliance? Are they doing some of what we are talking about?
01:39:56 Felicia King: What role is ASCII playing?
01:40:04 Alex Farling: As a former MSP owner and now vendor I’ll say that CompTIA feels “bought and paid for”… but to say that “vendors don’t get a vote, but we want their money” has the exact opposite feeling. There are a lot of us who want to support you, but it won’t be with a check and no input.
01:40:29 Bob Coppedge: keep in mind that several of the most outspoken people here are technically “vendors” (and I have no problem with their involvement).
01:40:38 Andrew Crawford: If our focus is the small MSP then why do we need vendors?
01:41:11 Felicia King: @Bob, that’s exactly why I said earlier that “Vendor” needs to be defined. A hardware/software manufacturer is different from a MSSP.
01:41:37 Robin Cole: Vendors aren’t SMB IT Service Providers. They have their own associations. Are we trying to unify the IT industry?
01:42:17 Robin Cole: Money – that tail will wag the dog. We have to pay our own way. Just my 2 cents.
01:42:22 Dave Seibert: Dan. Your arm 🙂 Hope it gets well 🙂
01:42:25 Felicia King: @Robin, hardware/software makers do not have a desire to unify the industry. They have already decided what their floor is. They have already decided if they are going to be channel focused or enterprise only.
01:42:35 Tim Golden: Again! This is a board decision with input from the sub commeitees
01:42:44 Alex Farling: My hope would be that elections steer the direction.
01:42:50 Bob Coppedge: @felcia, yuppers
01:42:52 Tim Golden: Right alex
01:43:01 Alex Farling: Vendors voice will be minimized even if they get a vote because we are so few
01:43:09 Brian Allison: We support our state’s CPA org, we pay to sponsor their annual meetings and others, we get the chance to speak on relevant topics. We don’t get to “drive” the org.
01:43:34 Karl Palachuk: Very old.
01:43:36 Karl Palachuk: https://bit.ly/ns-committee
01:43:37 Andre LeRoux: Vendors need to be separated from this group. I have seen vendors take over ASCII, SMBTechfest and CompTIA. They have their agenda and will try to steer the discussion in their direction. Vendors have more personnel (versus smaller businesses) to dominate a group and would prevent smaller businesses from having a voice. Vendors have a place but, again, separated from some of the discussions.
01:44:45 Niels Petersen: Off topic. In other industries, I have seen these types of organizations try to spring up, and they have often failed. We should research and discuss what we will be doing differently so we can succeed.
01:45:16 Michael Menefee: Not sure why we are still devoting all this time to vendors when we don’t even have the baseline structure setup yet. Vendors will want to pay for ad space which will then allow that money to have benefits to the group.
01:45:18 Felicia King: @Niels. Excellent point. This should be the focus of one committee.
01:45:36 Tim Golden: Have “we” even defined our mission, goals, objectives MGOs? Once that is defined everything that does not suppor that is just fodder
01:45:58 Ted Giesler: This discussion about vendors goes to the heart of the one person one vote principal. If vendors have a single vote, and MSPs have one vote, theorically there are more MSPs than vendors.
01:46:05 Tim Golden: Can we all agree that vendors have a space, what that look likes is yet to be defined.
01:46:53 Felicia King: Yet there is still a market for the hacks. There will always be a market for commodity shoppers.
01:47:37 Michael Menefee: Very true. Everyone like the flea market
01:47:43 Tim Golden: And w/o clear MGOs we can keep giving our opinions..but at what value.
01:47:48 Bob Coppedge: @felecia, absolutely. And if we focus too much on the MSP requirements instead of client responsibilities, cheap clients will simply find cheap alternatives.
01:47:50 Gloria Burt: I volunteer in a technical internship program that I would be happy to supervise them to give “help” if we can work it out remotely. We just need to write a job description, interview and then pick the person. If you want to contact me,Karl, I am happy to start the process.
01:47:56 Andrew Crawford: Dues should support the website and communications
01:48:50 Felicia King: @Bob Exactly, hence why I am in favor of definitions of minimum standards, which drives what clients must have. Not what MSPs must have, but what clients must have. Then the MSPs get educated about how to effectuate secure outcomes to meet those requirements.
01:49:10 Bob Coppedge: I think we should be able to put together a rough 6 month plan with a reasonable budget and goals. I’m willing to kick in some $ to cover those costs.
01:49:22 Ken Shafer: Summarizing so far… Action steps for all of us attending today: 1. Complete the form at https://bit.ly/ns-committee 2. Actively participate in the Forums on the website https://www.nsitsp.org/forums/forum/main-forum/
01:51:27 Bob Coppedge: @felicia, absolutely
01:51:33 Tim Golden: Don’t fear the vendor /)
01:52:37 Dave Seibert: +1 for Amy Luby 🙂
01:53:00 Karl Palachuk: Thanks, Ken.
01:53:06 Rich Szymanski: Well said Amy
01:53:11 Dan Tomaszewski: So sorry for my audio.
01:53:31 Denis Wilson: Yeah, Amy
01:54:56 Niels Petersen: we can have a vendor management committee.
01:55:31 Dave Seibert: +1 for vendor oversight committee. Seem like a great compromise toward the goal and mission
01:56:13 Tim – The Compliancy Guys: what are the current costs?
01:56:16 Bob Coppedge: I’m down for $1,000.
01:56:24 Andre LeRoux: +1 for a separate vendor committee.
01:56:44 Andre LeRoux: Will you accept Bitcoin?
01:56:47 Tim – The Compliancy Guys: are there current tangiabe costs (other than time)
01:56:50 Jim Bachaud: It’s in vendors’ best interest to grow a group that promotes the professionalism of the industry. The more that MSPs get professional tools and quit using the garbage free tools that trunkslammers love, the more the vendors will benefit from having their good tools used. The Organization can benefit by having some real cash available from Vendors to be able to Lobby and Advertise the way the AICPA or the NRA have been known to do.
01:57:46 Ted Giesler: Has the group been legally incorporated? And if so where?
01:58:48 Steve Roderick: Thank you for that Karl
01:59:07 Rayanne Buchianico: Yes, the organization is incorporated in Florida.
01:59:09 Michael Menefee: What are the next steps to keep this growing in the right direction.
01:59:11 Niels Petersen: I missed it, is there a way to pledge easily? If not, we should be setting that up sooner than later.
02:00:17 Alex Farling: We should have a business model that funds itself by EOY… and the burden from now till then shouldn’t fall on Karl alone.
02:00:20 Michael Menefee: I am in for helping the cause.
02:03:14 Felicia King: Competent MSPs protect the brands of the manufacturers by competently implementing solutions using their products.
02:03:48 Andrew Crawford: Vendors could recruit MSP partners
02:03:49 Jim Bachaud: @felicia – exactly.
02:04:06 Jason Thomas: +1 @felicia
02:04:25 Benaron Gleiberman: Hi Karl, i am not able to help much from Canada, but I certainly can add some financial help to the program!!!!
02:04:38 Felicia King: I would also suggest that it would be helpful if we could make it easier for prospective customers to differentiate between MSPs.
02:06:06 Ken Shafer: Thanks!!!
02:06:16 Robin Cole: Thanks
02:06:24 Jay Parisi: Good stuff, Thanks!
02:06:26 Denis Wilson: If you need some help to go through the forms, I will volunteer.
02:06:27 Ted Giesler: Thanks Karl.
02:06:29 Tom Wyant: Thank you!
02:06:33 Niels Petersen: One more time, link to the things we need?
02:06:34 John Eppes: Thanks for your time
02:06:38 Tim – The Compliancy Guys: thanks for pushing us forward
02:06:39 Craig Seibel: Thank you Karl!!!
02:06:41 Kim Leiby: Thank you!
02:06:45 Michael Menefee: Tahnk you
02:06:47 Patrick Collins: Thanks Karl and everyone.
02:06:49 Benaron Gleiberman: Thanks Karl