Re: [802SEC] +++ LMSC P&P Revision Ballot +++ WG Membership & Meeting P&P
Based on my previous comments and these comments, I'm voting disapprove until fixes are in place.
Additional comments:
7.2.3.1
There is no definition of "affiliation statement". I'm assuming that it is intended to be a way to get consultants and such to state who is paying for their attendance, but I think that is unenforceable. Also it is contradictory to the statement above that "members shall participate in the consensus process ... as individuals, and not as organizational representatives." A fine statement of priniciples if unenforceable. The requirement for an affiliation statement says we don't believe that fine statement is operational. When a consultant says their affiliation is self, are you going to contest it? I'm sure I can't vote for that requirement if you don't define what it is. Even if you do define it, I'm hesitant to approve it going in.
I agree with Tony's comments about the bookkemeping required for the "within 3 months of the plenary for which it substitutes". Also, under the current rules, many people become voters by attending a plenary and the following interim (especially at the start of a new area of work). These people often continue as valuable participants. Under the new rule, it appears to me that wouldn't qualify as it could only substitute for the plenary they attended. This extends the time to attain voting rights from 4 months to 6 months (for instance if they attended an interim in January which they substituted for the November plenary and attended the March plenary they could become a voter in July but if they attended in March and April they couldn't become a voter in July.) This seems unreasonable. I think the problem this is addressing was that the current rule is ambiguous on how old the interim could be. In particular, it could be argued under the current rule that someone could gain !
membership by having attended a plenary 4 plenaries ago and an interim before that and requesting voting membership by attending the current plenary. At the end of that plenary they would not have attended two of the last four plenaries and they definately wouldn't satisfy the new rule regarding the three most recent plenary sessions and the interims within that span. So they would loose voting rights at the end of the plenary.
To prevent this, the interim should be required to be within the span of the three most recent plenary sessions (i.e. the two plenaries prior to the one at which membership is requested and the one at which membership is requested) which would be tighter than the old rule but looser than the draft rule.
7.2.3.2
Please add: Members are responsible for maintaining there contact information so that they can receive email ballots and can be contacted if their email is bouncing. Membership may be lost if the member fails to keep their contact information up to date.
With the mobility of our members, this is a problem that must be addressed. Also, I believe 802.3 has been applying this rule for some time and I wouldn't like to see it cause a challange to progress of a draft in the future.
"within the span of the three most recent plenary sessions. Loss of membership through lack of attendance is deterimed at the end of each plenary session." It isn't clear to me whether "the three most recent plenary sessions" includes the current session or is the three before. I was thinking the latter in my prior email on this, but maybe it meant only the current one plus the two before in which the comment from the 802.19 participant is correct. I think this would be okay. Our intent is to ensure voters participate enough in our groups to be knowledgeable participants. Clearly, this is a greater challenge if one is trying to be a voter in two groups but it is a reasonable requirement.
7.2.4 There are a number of empty subclauses. I assume the intent is that the content of these clauses retains its current content rather than that they become empty clauses on approval of this revision.
7.2.4.5 Okay, I'm confused. The removal process takes a vote of 75% of the Working Group (presumably at a Working Group interim or at a plenary since it says "members present") followed by 30 days written notice and a meeting of the Executive Committee (which according to our rules only happens at plenaries since we decided not to allow teleconference meetings). So this process takes at least two months (given the usual distance between WG interims and plenaries) and for some groups at least 4 months. But according to 7.2.2 the group could have voted at the plenary to have an election for chair which removes the need to write up an indictment, takes effect within the week and doesn't have the uncertainty of an Executive Committee meeting on the charges. This process seems unlikely to occur. The only flaw in that is that 7.2.2 only mentions election of a chair at any plenary. Vice-chair should probably be added to 7.2.2's statement on having an election at any plenary.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-stds-802-sec@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
[mailto:owner-stds-802-sec@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG]On Behalf Of Sherman,
Matthew J. (US SSA)
Sent: Monday, 02 May, 2005 7:11 AM
To: STDS-802-SEC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [802SEC] +++ LMSC P&P Revision Ballot +++ WG Membership &
Meeting P&P
Dear EC members,
Attached you will find the text for an LMSC P&P revision ballot on WG
Membership & Meeting Policies and Procedures. This ballot was approved
at the Friday March 18, 2005 EC meeting. The text is identical to that
presented at the meeting (but changes have been highlighted). The
purpose and rationale for the ballot are as given in the attached ballot
document.
Ballot Duration: 5/2/2005 - 6/2/2005 @ 11:59 PM EST
WG/TAG chairs, please distribute this P&P revision ballot to your
groups, and invite them to comment through you. Please direct any
comments on this revision to the reflector for collection.
Thanks & Regards,
Mat
<<802.0-EC_Voting_Rules-P&P_Revision_ballot.pdf>>
Matthew Sherman, Ph.D.
Senior Member Technical Staff
BAE SYSTEMS, CNIR
Office: +1 973.633.6344
email: matthew.sherman@baesystems.com
----------
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.