Re: [802SEC] Question on Attendance Credit
Steve,
This is my opinion only, but I did state that new attendees,
and attendees without voting rights can register and gain
attendance credit if they provide affiliation at the session.
What I did say, was if someone is already a member, then they
should be on the .20 reflector and then they had a requirement to
get the affiliation data into Mat. I believe that this is based
on a directive that the SASB sent down to us. If they have failed
to do that, I don't know that they deserve to get attendance
credit.
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
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Shellhammer, Steve [mailto:sshellha@qualcomm.com]
> Sent: Friday, November 03, 2006 1:35 PM
> To: Mike Takefman (tak); STDS-802-SEC@listserv.ieee.org
> Subject: RE: [802SEC] Question on Attendance Credit
>
> Mike,
>
> Thanks.
>
> On another note, you mentioned that people have to have
> their affiliations letters in tonight. That seems reasonable
> for the majority of people. However, what if someone decides
> to attend at the last minute and register at the door? We
> always like to have people register in advance but still some
> people decide last minute to attend. We charge them more for
> registration but we still let them attend. If letters of
> affiliation are required a week in advance then that prevents
> someone from making a last minute decision to attend.
>
> So, in general I think everyone who knows they are
> going to attend should make every effort to send in their
> affiliation letters in advance. However, I think if we
> require it for 802.20 a week in advance then we in essence
> disallow anyone to register for 802.20 at the door.
> And, of course if this rule is extended to all working groups
> then we can eliminate walk up registration.
>
> Regards,
> Steve
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ***** IEEE 802 Executive Committee List *****
> [mailto:STDS-802-SEC@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Mike Takefman (tak)
> Sent: Friday, November 03, 2006 10:06 AM
> To: STDS-802-SEC@listserv.ieee.org
> Subject: Re: [802SEC] Question on Attendance Credit
>
> Steve,
>
> To me there is no doubt that they are having a session, but I
> recall hearing a statement on another conference call as to
> whether there was a 30 day requirement.
> Since
> I think this is the sort of thing that can come up, and would
> result in yet another set of appeals, I was thinking of
> getting us ahead of the curve.
>
> 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
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: ***** IEEE 802 Executive Committee List *****
> > [mailto:STDS-802-SEC@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Shellhammer, Steve
> > Sent: Friday, November 03, 2006 11:47 AM
> > To: STDS-802-SEC@listserv.ieee.org
> > Subject: Re: [802SEC] Question on Attendance Credit
> >
> > Mike and Paul,
> >
> > If there is still doubt whether 802.20 is holding an
> official meeting
> > in 10 days then I think something must have gone badly wrong.
> > Paul Nikolich notified the EC and the 802.20 members that there was
> > going to be a meeting. People have made travel plans. Now
> is not the
> > time to change that decision.
> >
> > You seem to imply that the EC can declare the meeting
> official but
> > Paul cannot. That is not clear to me.
> >
> > Paul, can you give the EC guidance on if an EC vote on
> whether this
> > is an "official" meeting is appropriate? I believe many
> people have
> > made travel plans based on your statement that 802.20 would meet. I
> > believe most people interpreted that to mean that the working group
> > would have an official meeting, since I cannot think of any other
> > interpretation.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Steve
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: ***** IEEE 802 Executive Committee List *****
> > [mailto:STDS-802-SEC@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Mike Takefman (tak)
> > Sent: Friday, November 03, 2006 7:10 AM
> > To: STDS-802-SEC@listserv.ieee.org
> > Subject: [802SEC] Question on Attendance Credit
> >
> > Dear EC,
> >
> > In discussions with Arnie and Paul a few questions came up that I
> > think we need to make some decisions on since it is
> possible that they
> > will be brought up at the session. Paul can determine if this is a
> > question for the unconflicted EC or the entire EC.
> >
> >
> > 1) Is the November 802.20 session duly constituted? According
> > to our rules,
> > interim sessions require 30 days notice, not plenaries.
> > The only catch is
> > that the notice of the lifting of suspension of 802.20 did
> > not occur 30days
> > prior to November, although the stated goal of the SASB
> > was to restart ASAP.
> > Plenaries are well known and the expectation of people
> > *should* have been that
> > this session would occur.
> >
> > That being said, I think the EC should affirm that this
> > session is like
> > any other duly constituted session.
> >
> > 2) Should the EC determine the session is not duly constituted then
> > I can imagine questions from attendees related to:
> > a) attendance credit for membership (does this session count)
> > b) gaining of voting rights (there was a large contingent
> > of people that
> > Mr. Upton said would become voting members at this
> > session. If this
> > is not considered a duly constituted plenary then they
> > don't get a chance
> > for voting rights until March
> > c) voting at the meeting, if this isn't a duly constituted
> > meeting, is it
> > the equivalent of a Study Group meeting, where all
> > attendees vote?
> >
> > 3) Matt Sherman has sent email to the dot20 reflector,
> > stating that they needed
> > to get their affiliation statements in by tonight in order
> > to participate.
> > Will we allow anyone who attends the meeting to sign a
> > form there? If so,
> > do they get to participate fully? I can imagine 2 classes
> > of people:
> > a) People who have already attended meetings, and should
> > be on the reflector.
> > b) People who for some reason are attending for the first
> > time ever and
> > therefore would not necessarily be part of the reflector.
> >
> > If someone can think of other questions that are likely to
> > come up, please chime in.
> >
> > Having posed the questions, let me start with my answers to
> > start the discussion.
> >
> > 1) This is a valid session, the stakeholders of this process
> > should be ready to
> > go once the SASB removed the suspension.
> >
> > 2) I believe the normal rules for attendance credit, gaining
> > voting rights and voting
> > at the session apply.
> >
> > Arnie is free of course as chair to ask questions twice.
> > Once to the membership
> > and once to the entire room. However, I think that anyone
> > who wishes to be part of
> > a straw poll has to have filled out a declaration of affiliation.
> > This brings us
> > to point 3
> >
> > 3) Anyone who is a current attendee of dot20 (is a member, or
> > about to become a member)
> > and did not send in a form, does not get to vote this
> > session. If they fill out a form
> > this session, they can be in straw polls.
> >
> > Anyone who is a new attendee, or cannot become a member
> > can fill out a declaration form
> > and be part of straw polls.
> >
> > I assume the following motions (or something like it) would be made
> >
> > "Move to confirm that the 802.20 Plenary Session is duly
> constituted"
> >
> > "Move to restrict voting at the 802.20 Plenary Session to
> > 802.20 voting members who completely fulfilled the
> > affiliation declaration requirement on time"
> >
> > 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
> >
> > ----------
> > 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.
>
----------
This email is sent from the 802 Executive Committee email reflector. This list is maintained by Listserv.