Re: [802SEC] determination of unconflicted vs conflicted status of new EC members
Paul,
Also happy to move or second any of these as needed.
Regards,
Mike
-----Original Message-----
From: ***** IEEE 802 Executive Committee List *****
[mailto:STDS-802-SEC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG] On Behalf Of Paul Nikolich
Sent: Wednesday, April 16, 2008 10:35
To: STDS-802-SEC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [802SEC] determination of unconflicted vs conflicted status of
new EC members
Dear EC members,
We have completed phases (1) and (2) of the 4 phase process outlined in
my 31MAR email below. On to phase 3--conduct of a UC-EC email ballots.
We'll start with the 3 unambiguous cases first:
Motion 1: "To add James Gilb to the Unconflicted EC"
Motion 2: "To add David Law to the Unconflicted EC"
Motion 3: "To add Bruce Kraemer to the Unconflicted EC"
I'll need a mover and a seconder for each of the above motions before
kicking off the UC-EC email ballots.
The motion of Mark Klerer will be handled separately as I am not exactly
sure how to craft a motion that reflects his desire/concern "I (Mark
Klerer) have not asked to be classified as "Unconflicted". I have
instead asked to not be classified as conflicted." Recommendations from
a mover/seconder on this item are welcome.
Regards,
--Paul
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, April 03, 2008 12:36 PM
Subject: determination of unconflicted vs conflicted status of new EC
members
All,
The criteria we shall use in classifying the new EC members as
Unconflicted or Conflicted regarding 802.20 decisions:
a) The "perception of conflict" is a test for disclosure: is the EC
member aware of a fact (about himself or someone else) that would cause
a reasonable person on the outside looking in to believe that the member
had an interest in the outcome or for whatever reason was unable to
decide in the best interest of the IEEE.
b) The test for a determination of an "actual conflict" was whether
there was in fact an interest that could prevent someone from making an
unbiased decision.
At this time, all 4 new EC members, James Gilb, David Law, Bruce Kraemer
and Mark Klerer, have asserted they should be classified as
Unconflicted. Per the below email, step (1) is complete and step (2)
has begun. Please use the next week to query each new EC member
regarding their classification assertion using this private email list.
At the end of next week, I will ask for a members of the UC-EC to make
four motions (one per new EC member) "To add XXX to the Unconflicted EC"
that we will conduct via the EC reflector. The Unconflicted EC members
qualified to cast a vote on these motions are: John Hawkins, Buzz
Rigsbee, Mike Lynch, Tony Jeffree, Bob Heile, John Lemon (and Paul
Nikolich if needed to break a tie.)
Regards,
--Paul
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Monday, March 31, 2008 2:57 PM
Subject: determination of unconflicted vs conflicted status of new EC
members
Dear Unconflicted EC members,
We need to classify our new EC members (James Gilb/SiBeam, David
Law/3Com, Bruce Kraemer/Marvell ;Mark Klerer/Qualcomm) into either the
unconflicted or conflicted category. I should have done this during the
elections--it would have been much easier.
We will make the determination over the next few weeks using the
following process:
1) Each new member to send an email to this private EC list declaring
their opinion on whether or not they believe they are conflicted by
Friday 4APR 2008 or sooner.
2) Open 1 week discussion period via private EC list email among EC
members (tentatively ending Friday 11APR08.)
3) Conduct a public (via EC reflector) 10-day UC-EC Email ballot to
determine the classification of Gilb, Law, Kraemer and Klerer
(tentatively ending 21APR08.)
4) Done
Regards,
--Paul
----------
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.