Re: [802SEC] +++un-conflicted EC motion #4 regarding 802.20+++determine Mark Klerer's unconflcted/conflicted classification+++need mover and seconder+++
Tony,
We are in deep weeds for sure and I personally agree with your first
recommendation. Unfortunately, the LMSC EC's request to SASB to dissolve the
UC-EC in Nov2007 was denied. As I recall, the SASB response to our request
was the UC-EC must stay in place until the 802.20 sponsor ballot is
complete.
As for how to handle the conflict/unconflicted-ness, I agree with John H.,
the classification and rights issues are independent. I'd like to make
progress on the classsification, since that is less ambigous. Then lets
tackle the rights issue.
--Paul
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tony Jeffree" <tony@jeffree.co.uk>
To: "Paul Nikolich" <paul.nikolich@ATT.NET>
Cc: <STDS-802-SEC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG>
Sent: Monday, April 21, 2008 12:15 PM
Subject: Re: [802SEC] +++un-conflicted EC motion #4 regarding
802.20+++determine Mark Klerer's unconflcted/conflicted
classification+++need mover and seconder+++
> Paul -
>
> On reflection, I believe we are in deep weeds here with regard to
> procedure.
>
> We (802) have no procedures in our P&P that define how an unconflicted EC
> works; all we have with regard to the UC-EC is a set of requirements
> imposed on us by the standards board. When they invented the UC-EC, I
> don't think that the SB anticipated the current situation at all - it was
> set up when Arnie was still Chair, so the question didn't arise. And as
> Bob O'Hara was frequently called upon to point out to us, we can't change
> our P&P simply by passing a motion. So, I believe that the only way to fix
> this is through the SB doing one of two things:
>
> - Dissolving the UC-EC; or
> - Making a ruling as to what rights an otherwise conflicted Chair of
> 802.20 might have when representing the wishes of his working group.
>
> Or possibly by the EC Chair simply stating how he will interpret the rules
> with regard to what a not-unconflicted Chair may do.
>
> I would personally advocate the first of these three solutions.
>
> Regards,
> Tony
>
>
> At 16:07 21/04/2008, Paul Nikolich wrote:
>>Buzz,
>>
>>I disagree--we must be consistent in determining the classification. The
>>determination of conflicted vs unconflicted must be made using the
>>criteria I established in my 3APR email (see extract below). This is
>>consistent with how we have treated every EC member regarding their
>>classification.
>>
>>Once we make the above decision, then we can take the second step.
>>
>>Regards,
>>
>>--Paul
>>
>>----- Original Message ----- From: Paul Nikolich
>>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.
>>
>>[...rest of email deleted...]
>>
>>
>>----- Original Message ----- From: "Rigsbee, Everett O"
>><everett.o.rigsbee@boeing.com>
>>To: "Paul Nikolich" <paul.nikolich@ATT.NET>;
>><STDS-802-SEC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG>
>>Sent: Monday, April 21, 2008 10:46 AM
>>Subject: RE: [802SEC] +++un-conflicted EC motion #4 regarding
>>802.20+++determine Mark Klerer's unconflcted/conflicted
>>classification+++need mover and seconder+++
>>
>>
>>
>>Paul, I think you have the right plan in the wrong order. I personally
>>would be a lot more comfortable judging Mark (and other EC members) to
>>be not Unconflicted if I was confident that they would be able to move
>>and vote for WG directed positions. So I think we need to clarify what
>>it means to be "not Unconflicted" before we vote on his status. Doesn't
>>that make sense ??? :-)
>>
>>
>>Thanx, Buzz
>>Dr. Everett O. (Buzz) Rigsbee
>>Executive Secretary, IEEE-802 LMSC
>>Boeing IT
>>PO Box 3707, M/S: 7M-FM
>>Seattle, WA 98124-2207
>>Ph: (425) 373-8960 Fx: (425) 865-7960
>>Cell: (425) 417-1022
>>everett.o.rigsbee@boeing.com
>>
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Paul Nikolich [mailto:paul.nikolich@ATT.NET]
>>Sent: Monday, April 21, 2008 7:37 AM
>>To: STDS-802-SEC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
>>Subject: [802SEC] +++un-conflicted EC motion #4 regarding
>>802.20+++determine Mark Klerer's unconflcted/conflicted
>>classification+++need mover and seconder+++
>>
>>Dear UC-EC members,
>>
>>I think we must follow a two step process.
>>- First, let's make the determination whether Mark Klerer is
>>unconflicted or
>>conflicted.
>>- Second, we'll decide on how to handle his rights as either an
>>unconflicte
>>or conflicted EC member.
>>
>>To take the first step, I would recommend the following UC-EC motion be
>>made
>>by an UC-EC member:
>>
>>Motion: Mark Klere shall not be added to the Unconflicted EC roster.
>>
>>Do I have a mover and seconder?
>>
>>Regards,
>>
>>--Paul
>>
>>
>>
>>----- Original Message ----- From: "Tony Jeffree" <tony@JEFFREE.CO.UK>
>>To: <STDS-802-SEC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG>
>>Sent: Monday, April 21, 2008 8:23 AM
>>Subject: Re: [802SEC] +++un-conflicted EC motion #4 regarding
>>802.20+++determine Mark Klerer's unconflcted/conflicted
>>classification+++need mover and seconder+++
>>
>>
>>>I would second such a motion.
>>>
>>>Regards,
>>>Tony
>>>
>>>
>>>At 19:59 20/04/2008, Rigsbee, Everett O wrote:
>>>>Paul, I much prefer the solution proposed by Roger Marks, that any
>>>>conflicted EC-members be entitled to propose and vote in favor of
>>>>motions submitted to them as directed positions from their Working
>>>>Group. It just seems fairer and more even-handed. And I have offered
>>>>to make a motion to that effect.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Thanx, Buzz
>>>>Dr. Everett O. (Buzz) Rigsbee
>>>>Executive Secretary, IEEE-802 LMSC
>>>>Boeing IT
>>>>PO Box 3707, M/S: 7M-FM
>>>>Seattle, WA 98124-2207
>>>>Ph: (425) 373-8960 Fx: (425) 865-7960
>>>>Cell: (425) 417-1022
>>>>everett.o.rigsbee@boeing.com
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>>From: Paul Nikolich [mailto:paul.nikolich@ATT.NET]
>>>>Sent: Sunday, April 20, 2008 11:46 AM
>>>>To: STDS-802-SEC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
>>>>Subject: [802SEC] +++un-conflicted EC motion #4 regarding
>>>>802.20+++determine Mark Klerer's unconflcted/conflicted
>>>>classification+++need mover and seconder+++
>>>>
>>>>Dear Unconflicted EC members,
>>>>
>>>>There has been discussion over the past wek regarding the
>>>>conflicted/un-conflicted classification of Mark Klerer, specifically
>>>>that if
>>>>he is not made a member of the UC-EC perhaps he should be given unique
>>>>status regarding placing 802.20 WG motions before the UC-EC. I don't
>>>>believe special status is needed to ensure fair and proper
>>consideration
>>>>of
>>>>802.20 WG business by the UC-EC. A special status will only serve to
>>>>complicate the unconflicted EC and conflicted EC classification
>>process.
>>>>If
>>>>Mark is classified as conflicted, he will have the right to propose
>>that
>>>>an
>>>>UC-EC member place a motion on the floor on his behalf, participate in
>>>>crafting the motion language and voicing an opinion on changes to it.
>>>>
>>>>To that end, I'd like to propose the following motion:
>>>>
>>>>Motion: Mark Klere shall not be added to the Unconflicted EC roster
>>and
>>>>shall have the right to propose that an UC-EC member place a UC-EC
>>>>motion on
>>>>the floor on his behalf, participate in crafting the motion language
>>and
>>>>
>>>>voicing an opinion on changes to it.
>>>>
>>>>I need a mover and and seconder for the above motion. Only UC-EC
>>>>members
>>>>may participate in the vote.
>>>>
>>>>Regards,
>>>>
>>>>--Paul Nikolich
>>>>
>>>>----------
>>>>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.
>>----------
>>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.