Re: [802SEC] Current Resolution on the 'WG Membership & Meetings' P&P Revision Ballot
Mike -
The comment I heard was that there would be "model WG P&P" dumped on us
from a great height at some time in the future. That being the case I see
no reason to hobble ourselves ahead of time by creating something that no
doubt will later have to be changed anyway once we have a clue as to what
the "model WG P&P" might do to us.
In the meantime, creating a situation where we have make-work, and
administrative make-work at that, imposed on us is unacceptable IMHO.
If enough of us rail at it, we can make it go away (at least for now).
Regards,
Tony
At 14:21 03/10/2005, Mike Takefman \(tak\) wrote:
>
>Tony,
>
>I railed at that particular bit of text (.17 has never needed
>WG P&P), but I was told this requirement was coming from the
>SA and we wouldn't have a choice about it in a few months.
>When the time comes, rest assured that .17 will do the minimum
>required in terms of WG P&P: Rule 1, there is no rule 1. Rule 2
>see rule 1.
>
>I also agree that we should have a consistent methodology
>for holding elections and more so, to have a methodology
>that brings to light any irregularities that might occur.
>
>cheers,
>
>mike
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Tony Jeffree [mailto:tony@JEFFREE.CO.UK]
> > Sent: Monday, October 03, 2005 9:09 AM
> > To: STDS-802-SEC@listserv.ieee.org
> > Subject: Re: [802SEC] Current Resolution on the 'WG
> > Membership & Meetings' P&P Revision Ballot
> >
> > Mat -
> >
> > I will not be able to support these changes - unfortunate,
> > because there is much in here that I do support and would
> > like to see approved ASAP.
> >
> > However, somewhere in this process, we seem to have acquired
> > an implicit requirement for WGs to establish their own
> > separate P&P - from 7.2.2:
> >
> > "WG election procedures shall be defined within the WG P&P.
> > Prior to their establishment, election procedures must be
> > reviewed and approved by the EC before implementation."
> >
> > and
> >
> > "The Officers of the WG defined in the WG P&P shall
> > constitute a Working Group Executive Committee (WGEC) as
> > referenced elsewhere in this P&P."
> >
> > We've managed to operate very effectively in 802.1 for >22
> > years without having to spend valuable meeting time on the
> > development of formal WG policies and procedures; it ain't
> > broke and it don't need fixing.
> >
> > If we need to document procedures for conducting WG officer
> > elections, there is absolutely no good reason why they
> > shouldn't be made consistent across 802, and therefore they
> > are better enshrined in the 802 P&P rather than forcing the
> > WGs to create another level of rules documentation to no very
> > good purpose.
> >
> > If this particular aspect of the rules change is included and
> > approved in November, it will effectively disallow any WG
> > that doesn't have established P&P for electing officers
> > (including 802.3, for example, who defer to the
> > 802 P&P on this point) from conducting officer elections.
> > That is, I believe, unacceptable, as establishing WG P&P
> > either from scratch or as a set of changes to existing WG P&P
> > can be (as we have found in this series of changes) a lengthy
> > and in some cases, non-terminating, process.
> >
> > If the two paragraphs quoted above remain in the document I
> > will have to vote against this set of changes.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Tony
> >
> > At 03:08 02/10/2005, Sherman, Matthew J. (US SSA) wrote:
> > >Folks,
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >We had a pretty good turn out for the last P&P meeting, and I felt
> > >there was a fair amount of consensus. Attached please find
> > the current
> > >resolution on the 'WG Membership and Meetings' P&P revision
> > ballot. If
> > >you feel you cannot support the changes in this document,
> > let me know.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >Note - I still need to update the document to reflect the approved
> > >changes from last plenary. I prefer to wait till I get a
> > final version
> > >of the approved updates from SA before doing any further
> > editing. But
> > >I will rewrite this revision against the updated P&P prior to the
> > >November plenary for clarity.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >Regards,
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >Mat
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >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.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Tony
> >
> > ----------
> > This email is sent from the 802 Executive Committee email
> > reflector. This list is maintained by Listserv.
> >
Regards,
Tony
----------
This email is sent from the 802 Executive Committee email reflector. This list is maintained by Listserv.