|
Geoff, the first case you describe is certainly alleviated, if not
eliminated with voting tokens. The second can be corrected if
there is a counting of hands/tokens. I don't know if it is a real issue
with any of the Working Groups. A more significant concern (after
eliminating non-voters from participating) is the use of Roll Call
Votes to analyze whether or not block voting is taking place. Have
you any suggestions on addressing this issue outside of establishing the record
of who is voting how with a roll call vote?
Thanks Geoff.
Best regards,
Robert D. Love President, LAN Connect Consultants 7105 Leveret
Circle Raleigh, NC 27615 Phone: 919
848-6773 Mobile: 919 810-7816 email: rdlove@ieee.org Fax: 208
978-1187
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, November 25, 2003 2:20
PM
Subject: Re: [802SEC] +++EC Motion+++
Rules Change Ballot on Roll Call Votes
Mike-
(DISAPPROVE at this point)
I applaud your
attempts to fix this. I am not sure that it is a tractable problem for reasons
that I will outline below.
But first the trivial fix:
- Change from:
- A roll call vote can be held at the discretion of the chair.
- Change to:
- A roll call vote may be held at the discretion of the
chair.
And you need to add that a motion and a
second is needed to call for a roll call
(and, I would hope that the vote
could not be by acclamation)
But further than that, I'm not wild about
your test criteria.
I believe that the problem in the Exec is that a
roll call represents two different situations.
Situation #1
Occurs in
fairly large groups without voting tokens.
Occasional problems arise when
non-voters participate in a vote.
There are two remedies to this
situation
a)
A caution from the WG Chair and a
re-vote.
b)
A roll call vote
Requests for a roll call vote from the floor have
traditionally been honored.
Requests for a roll call vote have been very
infrequent.
Situation #2
(This is somewhat speculative since I am
not in these groups. I welcome supplemental or corrective information)
Occurs in groups with voting tokens
These groups have less of a problem
with non-voters voting.
There are situations where there are strategic
voting issues with voting in a secret ballot vs a "public" roll call
vote.
A request for a roll-call vote can be used in this situation to slow
things down or to force members to vote "on the record".
My feeling is
that we need to (1) recognize these differences and (2) come up with a
solution that harmonizes or clearly differentiates these 2 situations rather
than trying to lump them into the same pot.
At this point I don't have
a particular idea on how to do that, but I believe that is the place to
start.
At 11:33 PM 11/24/2003 -0500, Mike Takefman wrote:
Dear EC Members,
as per the motion at
the November Plenary closing
EC meeting I am starting a (35 day)
ballot on
the proposed rule change. I am extending the ballot
to
account for the upcoming US Thanksgiving holiday
(and yes Canada has such
a holiday - its just a month
earlier).
I will be running a face to
face comment resolution session
during the January Interim Session to try
to finalize
the language. I believe sunday night is the best time
to
hold such a meeting, but I am open to other suggestions.
The language
you will find enclosed is different (and
I believe improved) from what
was shown at the EC meeting.
1) It attempts to provide better
sentence structure
(less of a run-on sentence).
2) It addresses an
issue brought up to me personally
by one of the 2 dissenting voters to
the rules change
motion in terms of insuring that roll call votes
cannot
be used as a delaying tactic.
Personally, I have only seen
roll call votes used in dot17
sparingly and they have in fact helped me
determine when a group
was attempting to block concensus / progress. As
such, there
has never been an issue with their use as a delay
tactic,
but I do have sympathy for such a
concern.
cheers,
mike
--
Michael
Takefman
tak@cisco.com
Distinguished Engineer,
Cisco Systems
Chair IEEE 802.17 Stds WG
3000 Innovation Dr, Ottawa,
Canada, K2K 3E8
voice: 613-254-3399
cell:613-220-6991
|