[802SEC] Concerns about EC process
Colleagues:
I am concerned about our process, I don't think problems are limited to the
two ongoing rules ballots, but perhaps these are the best examples of how
far away from the rules I believe we are operating.
1. I don't think these rules ballots were submitted to the members of IEEE
802 (see 3.6.3).
2. Comments from the membership were not solicited, the only announcement I
could find was addressed only to the SEC (see 3.6.3).
3. The EC rules ballots did not open 60 days prior to the plenary (see
3.6.3).
4. The announced EC rules ballots close date was not 30 days prior to the
plenary (see 3.6.3)
5. I find no provision for extension of the electronic ballot period. (3.4,
3.6). While 3.4.2.1 uses the words "minimum duration of the ballot", the
rules are mute on what extends the period or limits the period. Something
that needs to be cleaned up.
6. I find no provision to delegate the conduct of an electronic ballot (see
3.4.2.1). Our rules though do allow delegation of a rules change ballot
(see 3.6.3). So, it has to be a paper ballot to delegate? Perhaps something
to clean up in 3.4.2.1.
7. The electronic ballot is described with terms like "necessary" and "must
be made prior to the following plenary (see 3.4.2). As much as I disagree
with this restriction, I do not see how either of the rules change ballots
meet this criteria.
8. The LMSC chair only votes to break a tie (see 3.4). He voted on one of
the ballots. But wait, our chair is also our vice-chair . . . I'm sooooo
confused!
In our desire to expedite the processes of the Exec, I think we have left
the rules behind. I am curious if anyone else shares my concern.
--Bob Grow