As I see it now, what needs to be done are:
[Starting out]
* Research basics of steer committees (research for success).
* Determine criterion of Steering Committee.
- Determine optimal number of members. (thus far, 5-10)
- Determine what backgrounds needed (roles).

[In Steering Committee identity resolution]
* The vision document (now as a preliminary executive summary) needs to be agreed to.
* Nail down IAGO definition for “abstract strategy games” and what games fit in as stand alones.
* Determine revenue streams, and costs, based on vision document objectives *NEW*
* Calendar for 2009 IAGO World Tour needs to be started.
* The main event needs to be planned.

[Formation of IAGO to do's]
* All the minutia for governance of IAGO needs to be put in place (Bylaws, etc…).
- Officers and their roles
- Structure of IAGO
- Relationship of IAGO to IAGO World Tour (IAGO World Tour Enterprises)
* Anything else in place that needs to that sustains momentum, in order to prevent any one person (that includes me) or group of people, from derailing success. This also involves having lock down with the finances to prevent people from embezzling funds, taking needless risks, or getting stupid.
* IT Infrastructure needs to be in place.
* Legal documents
* Time table for execution

Mission Statement
The International Abstract Games Organization (IAGO) seeks to be the governing body for abstract strategy games that currently do not have representation, and a coordinating body for organizations that currently act as governing bodies over specific abstract strategy games. IAGO seeks to bring together the best in classic, modern, and commercial abstract strategy games in a unified effort. IAGO seeks to coordinate efforts of all stakeholders in abstract gaming. The objective of such coordination is an increase in the popularity and interest in abstract strategy games. By also coordinating the efforts of all involved with table games (a range of games from commercial boardgames to classic and modern card games), IAGO seeks to also increase the revenues derived from abstract strategy games specifically, and from table gaming generally. Table games (and table gaming), as defined here, represent all games at which the game is played around a flat surface, such as a table.

Objectives
1. Working with the GAISF and the IMSA, increase the number of abstract strategy games at the World Mind Sports Game, with the objective of turning the World Mind Sports Games into a distinct Olympics for a wide range of classic table games, abstract and otherwise.
2. Increase cash prizes for tournaments to newsworthy sizes. Part of this objective will be the coordinating the distribution of cash prizes to occur at concurrent multi-game large-scale tournament over the same time period, and at the same venue.
3. Create a television network for abstract strategy games, and other table games, such as poker. The objective of the television network is to provide a single location for programming that would appeal to people who play games the network covers and individuals who do not play games. One of the network's missions will be to create new players of abstract strategy games.
4. Be able to package abstract strategy games for television, in such a way, that it proves to be captivating programming for individuals who don't play abstract strategy games.
5. Produce an official magazine for IAGO (“IAGO World Tour Magazine”), that will be sustainable long term, and provide a foothold in the publication arena. The magazine would have a balanced mix of classic, commercial and modern abstract strategy games. The magazine would cover strategy, news, reviews, interviews, puzzles, and also description of new abstract strategy games and variants. The magazine, like the television programming, would serve to captivate the interest of non-abstract strategy game players.
6. Create a Hall of Fame and Museum dedicated to abstract strategy games. This museum and Hall of Fame may be part of a larger Museum and Hall of Fame Complex dedicated to table games in general. It could, alternatively, be an extension of a current game hall of fame and museum.
7. Provide a way for physical venues for regular league play to all over geographically, allowing people a chance to get out and play. These venues will enable sanctioned play, to prevent cheating. These venues may be formed in partnership with other types of tabletop games, such as poker (in a legal to play everywhere format). Due to the nature of poker, it needs to be played face to face in physical venues to be played correctly. This need by poker will be able to server as a means to obtain venues to play abstract strategy games.
8. Make abstract strategy games more commercially viable, so that game designers and players of such games will be able to make sustainable living involving such games.
9. Build a complete package of benefits for members, that IAGO and partner organizations will be able be sustainable from member dues, and serve as a motivation for obtaining and retaining members. This member benefit package would serve as a model for other game-related organizations, in order to provide a stronger negotiating effort on behalf of all members of all the organizations for better benefits at a lower cost. This effort will improve the economic sustainability of all organizations jointly sharing in the benefit package.
10. Raise the level of abstract strategy games played in college level to that of football, where full scholarships for individuals who play abstract strategy games, can be offered. This is part of a larger strategic effort to increase the number of individuals playing abstract strategy games, particularly among teens and pre-teens.
11. Expand demographics that are that are underdeveloped in regards to abstract strategy games. The number of new players would come from people who play other games currently, but not abstract strategy games, and also people who do not play games at all. The end result of this expansion will be a large globally networked community of players and stakeholders who play or follow abstract strategy games in some capacity. The objective is to have a mulit-fold increase in players and stakeholders.

Functions
1. Act as the official governing body of abstract strategy games that currently do not have governing bodies over them.
2. Act as a coordinating organization between different organizations that govern and represent specific abstract strategy games.
3. Coordinate the synchronizing and establishing of season and tournament calendars for all games, to facilitate the holding of a finals tournament for all abstract games at the same time, and in the same location, if possible.
4. Coordinate in the standardization of equipment used for sanctioned IAGO events and also to provide a known base of equipment for game designers to develop games around.
5. Provide an outlet, and proving ground, for established organizations to experiment with variations on their games and tournament play (example: using items like a backgammon doubling cube in tournament play) to test the effectiveness of changes in their official rules before they are adapted formally by the organization. IAGO can serve as a way for all associations involved with it to see if a specific idea works for them. This can provide a way to accelerate needed changes to play by established associations.
6. Provide a fair method of allocating profits/surpluses generated by IAGO activities to appropriate partner organizations, for their operation, and also prize money for related abstract strategy games.
7. Work together with other forms of table games to establish physical venues for players of abstract strategy games to be able to go and officially play, ideally having places equivalent to pool halls or bowling alleys. Provide effect systems and standard to maximize profitability of such venues, and the total quality of such venues to best serve the interest of all abstract strategy players involved with IAGO. Such venues will also work to provide a place for fair play, and reduction of cheating.
8. Work together to establish common technology standards and equipment to facilitate the playing of abstract strategy games.
9. Coordinate marketing and branding efforts between organizations to insure maximum positive impact.
10. Promote events that challenge players to master multiple games, through the IAGO World Tour, as stand alone events, and in the form of Athlons (Biathlons, Triathlons, Decathlons) in order to increase media awareness of each game in the Athlon events. This will also be done to capture the interests of players who prefer to master multiple games. In this effort, IAGO will seek to crown a World Abstract Strategy Game Champion over all abstract strategy games, and potentially champions over all variants of specific games, such as a Chess Variants World Champion.
11. Work to make abstract strategy games more appealing to media coverage, lending towards formats that are captivating over the television, in order to increase popularity. Have such games work on television as successfully, if not more successfully, than poker.
12. Work to expand abstract strategy games into new markets and demographics that are underdeveloped.
13. Coordinating efforts in order to provide the best member benefits by all organization members, by jointly negotiating for member benefits for IAGO and partner organizations.
14. Accurately hear and reflect the interest of individuals members of IAGO. Members of IAGO will speak for which unrepresented games will be considered sanctioned games by the organization.
15. Increase awareness of the organization, and increase the value of IAGO and partner organization, as a trusted brands, in order to increase revenue. Engage in this the de-commoditization of abstract game equipment in order to increase the value to related organizations. Work to make IAGO, and partner organizations, as brands that will be licensed to generate revenues.
16. Set standards and jointly manage all sources of income into IAGO, including corporate sponsorship.
17. Provide legal support for members, partners, and stakeholders in IAGO.

This is an initial attempt at coming up with the structure for IAGO, including the leadership. This needs to be reviewed and agreed to.

(Head of IAGO)
(Sevan) - Prior to an officer and director structure to be decided upon it needs to be decided if this will be a for profit or a not-for-profit organization. It will make a difference.
(Sevan) - or Executive Director? President/CEO: Head of office. Sets vision.
(Sevan) - I personally don't recommend using CxO titles for IAGO. Vice President (COO): Oversees operations of business, back up president.
(Sevan) - this doesn't fly with me, nor will it fly with governing bodies for not-profit status or many potential sponsors. The risk for misuse is too high. The total number of Officers and Directors should be an even number. In the case of a tie vote the matter is tabled until the next meeting where the proposer comes back with more info to persuade those that voted against(These have has irreversable veto power)

(Sevan) - definately. One person one vote, irregardless of what positions they have.

(Board of Directors)
(Sevan) - BoD members may have areas of special skills / capabilities but I would not envision as below. Many of these are more committee type positions. We'll have to flesh this out. The responsibilities outlined below yes are a good depiction, but I don't believe they need to be on the Board. Also the Board should include 2-3 individuals NOT part of any gaming body. To give more 'respect' to the organization by having external individuals.
* Secretary: Oversees documentation process and record keeping
* Tournaments and Events Directors: Oversees both IAGO World Tour and main event. League and events may need their own office.
Organizations such as the USCF and Go Federation would have input with the Director through Table Games Community Liason. Also coordinates with regional committee chairs to insure that events are coordinated properly.
* Commissioner/Standards Committee: Rules on standardization of equipment and game rules.
* Chief Information Officer (CIO): Direction of computer/data infrastructure.
* Chief Financial Officer (CFO): Bean counter. Overseeing financial. Need accountant background here.
* Chief Legal Council (CLC): Provides legal advice and management. Handles contracts. Along with president and CEO, has veto power (irreversable). Veto power based on rules and regulations in different regions. Oversees potential lawsuits for partners and IAGO.
* Chief Media/Marketing Officer (CMO): Responsible for IAGO World Tour Magazine and other media properties, such as TV programming. Also would coordinate marketing. Also handles licensing and intellectual properties negotiations. Handles PR and sponsor relations.
* Table Game Community Liason (TGCL): Responsible for liasoning with other game leagues, associations and organizations that are not abstract-strategy games for larger actitivies, such as olympics, or other worldwide joint championship, and possible joint programming television network. (Advisory position?)
* Advisor(s): Provide input, but no voting rights. Would be occupied by different stakeholder groups.
* Regional committee chairs: Involved with the management of regions around the world, divided by languaged and/or geography.

(Representatives)
* Designer Representative: Coordinates with CLC and Event Director position on leagues and events. I would also recommend there be a Player's Congress that the Player Rep on the board would oversee. This is for getting input into the minutia. OPTION: Has veto power (reversable only by unanimous vote of every other officer on board). This position could be one put up for vote every 4 years among members of the desigern's forum. For designers of new abstract strategy games.
* Players and Clubs Representative: Player's input into direction of leagues and input into member benefits (measuring customer satisfaction). Also oversees IAGO approved leagues and events. Coordinates with CLC position on leagues and events. I would also recommend there be a IAGO Player's Congress that the Player Rep on the board would oversee. This is for getting input into the minutia. OPTION: Has veto power (reversable?). This position could be one put up for vote every 4 years by the Player's Congress.
* Associations Representative: Represents all partner associations.
* Manufactures and Merchants Rep: Sellers in the marketplace are represented by this position.
* Sponsors Rep: Sponsors in IAGO are represented by this position.

Financial issues would be decided between the president, CEO and CFO. This involves financial operation issues, dues membership costs, etc… CFO could have veto power over financial proposals.


(Governing bodies and organizations)
- Steering Committee: Helped to get the association off the ground, voting and approving of business plan and constitution. Will end up disbanded (or changed into something else), once the association starts).
- Board of Directors
- Standards Committee: Sets standards for equipment rules, development of standarizing rules for games, and interplay between them (in Athlons)
- Representative Congresses and Committtees: Each rep has its own congress to elect its representatives, and have input. These consist of: Designers, Players and Clubs, Associations, Manufacturers and Merchants, and Sponsors.
- Regional Committee: There are multiple of these. They represent different regions around the world, divided by language and geography.

(Issues to consider also)
* Veto power. Issues to vote on: On procedures of operations, change in officers, addition and removal of board member positions.
* Issues impacting other associations and networking with them. The Table Game Community Liason position is a place where they input.
Possible Liason congress may be needed.

(Sevan) one recommendation I have is to keep things simple. The more complexity you add the worse it will become. BoD and Officers appoint heads of committees. Committe Heads will form the committees (4 people generally is manageable). Committee Heads will made recommendations and report up to Board Members potentially having to find a 'sponsor' within the BoD/Officers to champion an idea and get it to be voted upon.

Rich Hutnik (6/16/08) On comments by Sevan (and additional notes):
1. I agree that there is a need on the part of the steering committee to finalize whether it should be non-profit or for-profit. This is why the management structure is a bit vague at this point, because experts in this area need to review (My feeling now is that non-profit would be the most logical approach, but there is a lot more paperwork, costs and overhead involved doing this). It was based off original work for a for-profit game organization. Once the steering committee agrees to form, based upon study, the names would be decided.
2. If it is decided to go non-profit, then a large number that is in the board currently would end up being in committees. The board then would end up moving up to the head section.
3. I do believe the idea that the board should be independent of related game organizations at this point. Related game organizations will end up voting here on who is in there though. Considering of activity will be by established organizations, and their members, one will need to be careful exactly where these people come from. I believe it is more important to have qualified people involved than worry exactly where they are from. I do believe there should be balance, as the current steering committee is
4. I am leaning towards having “Congresses” in addition to committees, to give designers, players, associations, etc… a collective voice and enable them to vote on resolutions.
5. Due to what is attempted to be accomplished by IAGO itself, and the potential power it would carry, I would like to spin it off from IAGO World Tour Enterprises (the current DBA it rests in). I believe there should be a for-profit company responsible for setting up licensing and so on, and look to generate profits (for-profit term), and reflect the wishes of the collective whole.
6. Sevan, I see that the objectives have been bolded. Are your concerns mainly with the governing structure, or do you feel that there are issues with the objectives? Main thing now is the objectives and functions I would like to get finalized. I do agree that the governance section needs to be worked out. I believe the objectives can be tweaked, but my checking of the pulse is that these represent where abstract strategy gaming exists now, and is in need. Yes, it is very aggressive, and we may have to table a lot for years, may be possible (also some may never come to pass), but they represent the core.
7. I believe also we need to work on standards, values, and a document representing acceptable conduct need to be developed also. Things such as where management would communicate (aka, do we use Usenet or other web forums), and what conduct is expected, is needed to be gone over. There is risks of lawsuits being generated, if that isn't done.

Alex Rabinovich (6-20-2008) comments on IAGO vision: In general I like the vision part. One note only: it seems like vision is mostly concentrating on offline and media channels, like TV and federations(associations). What about the online activities? How about organizing some online events with exposure to a larger audience?

Alex Rabinovich (6-20-2008) general comments:

I agree with Sevan's note about complexity. The naming is also less important as long as people know their areas of responsiniliy and are tasks oriented. CFO, CEO, CxO might look good on paper, while in reality each one of us has to produce some results. Rich, since you know most of us( if I can claim so), you probably have a better way of judgement who will be best for what role.

Also, it would be nice to have some centralized source of information about all members. This way we all can go and see which areas can/should be assign to all of us. Emails are fun, but would be nice to have it stored in one place. Would it be too much to ask everybody to send some info about themselves?

I really enjoyed reading about Sevan living whole life in the same neighboorhood :)

that's it for now.

We need to define next steps, milestones and deadlines if we want to move this thing somewhere.

Wish you all a great weekend, Alex

R. Hutnik 6/21/08
Thanks for the feedback here Alex. Several comments here I wanted to add. One, regarding promotion. I believe everything is needed to draw attention. Getting things offline enable to get into he minds of people who normally don't visit places. I am under he understanding that the Internet is GREAT for people who know what they are looking for, and have set interests. However, you need to go offline in order to gain the attention of people who don't think of looking somewhere.

Second, the Internet is an important part of the IAGO World Tour and events. A number of events are on the Internet. I am up for whatever you can have to input here regarding how to promote on the Internet. Navigating new media to get growth is important. I do know, however, with chess (and other games) there is a but of “vulturism” where there is heavy competition to get people to visit this site or that, but not a coordinated effort to grow the whole. I believe this is important. Again, if you can use Online to generate large scale interest, I am definitely interested. Nothing should be considered off the table here, outside of things that work against objectives and values of IAGO.

I also wanted to sum up on the roles here in a last point. At this point, I believe the job now is to plan out how IAGO will be a non-profit. I believe we need to agree to what the objectives are, and sign up to them. Then the roles can come into place. I had asked people on who I felt had expertise in given areas, to effectively input here. As for the roles discussion, I would like to table that until the vision is agreed to and people “sign” and say they approve. We get that in place (the vision section agreed to) then we do need to move onto the milestones and so on. Also, we will need yesses to everything here so we can proceed.

By the way, this document is the central repository for discussions. I am up for other sources. I do have a Yahoo group up, which could be used, if that is preferable.

Please place your name below, if you agree with this document.

6/21/2008: Hello Rich and entire steering committee:

Your document gets all of us started towards a common goal . Nothing is ever perfect, but we need to begin at some point and can later fine tune. I endorse your concept and the document.

Regards: Alan Millhone, President American Checker Federation

6/21/08 Hello, all:

Alan has said it well. While I have questions and confusions, I'm happy to see this moving along. This is a necessary step. It needs to be done. We fix things as they need fixing. I'm in.

Joe Joyce