Re: [802SEC] myBallot issues feedback
Chris,
I agree with Bob that it's important to be able to track, between ballots, which comments are satisfied. I think that his suggestion of a separate variable for this would be fine.
Bob mentioned that 802.16 does this without a separate variable. I think that this method would solve the same problem, and it might make for an easier software upgrade. The idea is to add an extra comment type so that, in addition to MSB ("must be satisfied"), you add a new comment type that you could call, for example, HSB ("has been satisfied"). I don't think there would be a policy problem if you allowed MSB to be switched to HSB between ballots. This wouldn't be the same as removing the MSB designation, because the HSB would continue to convey the message that the comment was submitted as MSB.
Roger
At 16:44 -0800 2005-03-31, Grow, Bob wrote:
> Christina:
>
>On issue two, the issue isn't the ability to flip Must be Satisfied
>after ballot, this was only one possible way of providing the needed
>feature. The objective is to eliminate the unnecessary content from the
>recirculation and submittal packages. What David and I originally asked
>for was a separate flag that indicates satisfaction with the response to
>the comment/proposed remedy. (802.16 has been doing this with
>additional response codes while we use the separate variable.)
>
>The ability to filter out satisfied comments would significantly improve
>the signal to noise ratio both for users in Recirculation and at RevCom
>review. Commenters may be satisfied with the resonse for most
>resolutions (accept, principle, and even reject when they accept they
>were wrong).
>
>--Bob Grow
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-stds-802-sec@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
>[mailto:owner-stds-802-sec@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG] On Behalf Of Paul Nikolich
>Sent: Thursday, March 31, 2005 1:17 PM
>To: STDS-802-SEC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
>Subject: [802SEC] myBallot issues feedback
>
>Dear EC members,
>
>Please see the below message from Christina Sahr regarding the myBallot
>issues that were brought up during the IEEE 802 Task Force meeting at
>the
>March plenary session. If you have any further questions or issues,
>please
>forward them to Christina.
>
>Regards,
>
>--Paul Nikolich
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: <c.sahr@ieee.org>
>To: <paul.nikolich@att.net>
>Cc: <a.ickowicz@ieee.org>
>Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2005 12:47 PM
>Subject: 802 Task Force Meeting 3/16
>
>
>> Paul
>>
>> Thank you for including me on the myBallot discussion during the Task
>> Force
>> Meeting on March 16th. I am now back in the office and have prepared
>my
>> notes (issues and responses) below. Please advise if I missed any
>thing
>> or
>> if further clarification is needed. Please distribute to those who
>were at
>> the meeting that need to have this information.
>>
>> Issue 1) Special Characters in the comment file upload.
>> Resolution: We are going to provide the user with a better error
>message
>> when the file does not load properly. We will adjust the help pages to
>> clearly reflect what is and is not accepted. we will also offer (in
>the
>> help pages) alternative solutions for uploading comments that have
>> "special
>> characters".
>> The reason special characters cannot be used in the comment is because
>> only
>> comments containing standard ANSI-ASCII characters may
>> be uploaded. This does *not* include formatting (bold, fonts, italic,
>> etc); special characters (symbols, non-ANSI-ASCII characters,
>> non-English font sets, smart quotes, etc); nor special constructs such
>as
>> tables, math formulas (other than those that can be represented with
>> standard ANSI-CHARACTERS) or graphics. If a voter's comments require
>any
>> of these, they should be placed in a Word document and then the word
>> document referred to in the comment. Multiple comments may be placed
>in
>> single word document and referred to as individual comments in the
>> upload.
>> All of this will be clearly identified in the help pages.
>>
>> Issue 2) User should be able to remove their Must Be Satisfied from
>their
>> comment after ballot has closed.
>> Resolution: When the ballot has closed, myBallot will lock out all
>changes
>> except to comment resolution until the next cycle (or forever if there
>> is no next cycle). Exceptions such as this (or vote changes) can be
>> documented in the comment field by the sponsor, e.g. "Since the close
>of
>> ballot, the voter has indicated that he wants to remove his MSB and
>this
>> comment is considered cleared to the satisfaction of the user."
>>
>> The POLICY is that comments, MSBs and votes can *only* be entered into
>the
>> system during the official 'open' periods of initial ballot or
>> recirculation. Staff will pursue further policy issues with ANSI and
>> possibly consider "vote flipping" for future enhancements.
>>
>> Issue 3) Approval of Balance of the Ballot Group is no longer
>"required"
>> by
>> the Sponsor Chair.
>> Resolution: myBallot does not need a written authorization of the
>approval
>> of balance since the system checks it automatically. However, the
>> sponsor chair can look at the ballot group and provide the WG Chair
>the
>> verbal approval to move to the next step (open the ballot).
>>
>> Issue 4) David Law cannot open a ballot
>> Resolution: I believe this is fixed, I have asked David to go into
>the
>> system and verify.
>>
>> Issue 5) Days of an invitation is not a full 24 hour day. Example:
>If
>> Sponsor opens the invitation on Jan 1 at 12 noon and Staff
>> approves the invitation on Jan 2 at 12 noon; the invitation starts at
>12
>> noon on Jan 2 and remains open for the number of days designated by
>the
>> sponsor/designee (usually 30 days). However the counting of days
>begins
>> at
>> 12 noon on Jan 2 which is really only a half day.
>> Resolution: Since Staff approval is needed to start the invitation,
>and
>> approval only can occur during business hours, there will always be a
>few
>> hours lag
>> in time. Staff or Ballot Designee should add one extra day on to the
>> invitation days. Example: If the invitation is to be open for 30 days
>the
>> request should
>> really be for 31 days.
>> In addition, we will modify the help pages to clearly say that the
>ballot
>> or invitation will run from the day of approval to 11:59pm on the
>> requested
>> close date.
>>
>> Issue 6) Ability to edit comments by the submitter once submitted.
>The
>> user should be able to delete or at least edit a comment once it has
>been
>> accepted into the myBallot system.
>> Resolution: This has been covered before. Once entered, comments are
>> there
>> for the duration and can be edited or deleted only by entering a new
>> comment
>> stating such. We *do* allow changing the MBS state and vote as often
>as
>> desired *while* the original ballot or a recirc is in progress.
>>
>>
>
>----------
>This email is sent from the 802 Executive Committee email reflector.
>This list is maintained by Listserv.
>
>----------
>This email is sent from the 802 Executive Committee email reflector. This list is maintained by Listserv.
----------
This email is sent from the 802 Executive Committee email reflector. This list is maintained by Listserv.