| Thread Links | Date Links | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thread Prev | Thread Next | Thread Index | Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index |
|
I don’t believe I am banned from voting, so I vote APROVE.
Mat
Matthew Sherman -----Original Message-----
Folks,
I see this in my inbox, but not in my sent folder. So in case Outlook created some major blunder, I’m sending it again!
Mat
Matthew Sherman -----Original Message-----
Dear EC members,
Below is the status on the LMSC P&P Revision Ballot on Precedence. The ballot closes tomorrow (Thursday) October 2nd at 11:59 PM EDT. Please identify any inaccuracies you detect in my status report. If you have not voted, there is less than a day to do so. There are a lot of DNVs (Did Not Vote) as yet. So please, get in your votes! All comments received to date are attached.
Best Regards,
Mat
Ballot Results and comments as of 5/8/03
00 Paul Nikolich DNV 01 Geoff Thompson DNV 02 Matthew Sherman APR 03 Buzz Rigsbee APR 04 Bob O'Hara APR 05 Bill Quackenbush DIS 06 Tony Jeffree APR 07 Bob Grow DNV 08 Stuart Kerry DNV 09 Bob Heile APR 10 Roger Marks APR 11 Mike Takefman APR 12 Carl Stevenson DNV 13 Jim Lansford DNV 14 Gary Robinson DNV
------------------------------------------------------- totals: 7 APR 1 DIS 0 ABS 7 DNV
10 APPROVES (2/3 majority) are required to PASS. Ballot is failing currently.
Comments
Bill Quackenbush [billq@attglobal.net] Sun 9/28/2003 8:24 PM
While I agree with the intent of this proposed revision, I have a number of problems with the proposed text.
1) It is obvious from the list of documents under which the LMSC operates that the LMSC has an organization relationship with at least three entities, the IEEE, the IEEE-SA and the Computer Society. However, the is no indication in text or Figure of Section 1 of the relationship between the LMSC, the IEEE and the IEEE-SA and there is no indication of the relationship between the Computer Society, the IEEE and the IEEE-SA. It is my understanding that the relationship is not a strict linear hierarchy and I request that these relationships be added to the text and Figure of section 1. Such information seems quite appropriate for an "Overview" section.
2) One of the documents under which the LMSC operates is the "IEEE Financial Operations Manual" (FOM). This document is missing from the list and needs to be added. I suspect that it should follow the IEEE Polices, but you need to check on that.
3) I think that the paragraph immediately preceding the list of documents would be clearer and more accurate if changed to the following.
"The operation of the LMSC is subject to regulations contained in a number of documents including these Policies and Procedures. The regulating documents are identified in the following list and are listed in their order of precedence from highest to lowest. If any two documents in this list give conflicting regulations, the conflict shall be resolved in favor of the document of higher precedence.
Bill Quackenbush [billq@attglobal.net] Sun 9/28/2003 11:25 PM
And two other things.
4) I find it rather curious that the IEEE BoD resolutions are lower in precedence than the IEEE Bylaws and IEEE Policies and Procedures (actually, this document is entitled the IEEE Policies, not Policies and Procedures), but the IEEE-SA Bylaws are lower in precedence than the IEEE-SA Operations Manual and the IEEE-SA BoG resolutions. I find it very difficult to believe that this is the correct order of precedence for IEEE-SA documents. Please check the ordering.
5) Then there is the question of where to check to determine if the order of precedence of these documents has changed and whether documents have been added or removed from this list. The source(s) of this ordering needs to be stated.
Sherman,Matthew J (Matthew) Mon 9/29/2003 12:38 PM
Bill,
Thanks for the inputs. My one question is whether your first change is really necessary. There are (in my opinion) many flaws in how our reporting relationships to various IEEE entities are represented in the P&P. I am not trying to correct them in this change. It is a separate topic, and I feel out of scope given the definition of this change (adding a precedence section). Your other requested changes I feel are in scope.
Comments?
Bill Quackenbush [billq@attglobal.net] Mon 9/29/2003 12:38 PM
Mat,
It is the presence of the IEEE and IEEE-SA documents in the list of regulating documents that is being added to the P&P that now raises the issue of the organizational relationships between the LMSC, the IEEE-SA and the IEEE and the relationships between the Computer Society and the IEEE-SA and the IEEE.
We can agree to disagree on this, but I believe we now need to correct the absence of the IEEE and the IEEE-SA in the org charts and the text.
Matthew Sherman -----Original Message-----
Dear EC members,
Attached you will find the text for an EC Policies and Procedures revision ballot on Precedence. This letter ballot was approved at the Friday, July 25, 2003 plenary session. The scope and purpose of the changes being balloted are as given in the attached ballot document.
The ballot opens today – September 2, 2003 and closes October 2, 2003 at 11:59 PM Eastern Time (Daylight or Standard as applicable). (Remember if you do not vote or abstain it is equivalent to a DISAPPROVE vote). Buzz, please ensure this gets sent to the "802ALL" email list as well. WG chairs, if you haven't already done so, please invite your WG members to comment through you.
Regards,
Mat
Matthew Sherman
|