Thread Links Date Links
Thread Prev Thread Next Thread Index Date Prev Date Next Date Index

Re: [802SEC] straw poll summary of on the question of interim EC telecon meetings

Buzz-

I have to disagree with you on this.
This is not about us as the Exec, a body of less than 20 people.
Our rules and past procedures properly set the expectations to our 802 constituency on how we do and will operate. Our rules, while they do not explicitly forbid meetings of the proposed sort, clearly are oriented around something else, i.e. 2 face-to-face meetings at plenaries and mail ballots in between meetings.
I don't think we are too anal about "The Rules" given that we are an organization of over 1000. 

I do think that our rules change process is broken.
It is far too cumbersome and painful to change our rules.
I believe we need to give some serious thought to lightening up the rules change process.
I am fully in favor of taking a vote on "an agreement in principle" on the phone meetng issue at the closing EC in July. I don't think the EC should vote on this before consulting with the Working Groups whom we represent.
I do not think this is a step we should take on the fly and without warning between plenaries. 
I do not think this is a step we should take lightly.

Geoff

On 4/23/10 4:47 PM, Everett O. (Buzz) Rigsbee wrote:

Colleagues,    I honestly think we are beginning to be way too anal about
"The Rules".  My suggestion would be that if we have a proposal for new
policy which is not strictly prohibited by our existing rules but not
explicitly allowed either, then we may by a simple majority vote to enable a
trial period for the new policy, so that we can decide if it is in fact a
beneficial and worthwhile policy or not, and then based on that decide
whether to proceed with the rule change to make the policy explicit or
abandon the policy.  Given the large amount and time and energy that goes
into making a rule change, I would hate to see us have to go through all of
that only to later decide it wasn't a useful policy after all and have to
reverse the rule change.  I don't think we want our rules to handcuff us and
prevent us from trying out possible process improvements to judge whether
they are useful or not.  Once we are sure we want to make the change, it is
a simple matter to bundle the rule change text into the next rule change
process cycle, and if that takes a while, so be it; it does not need to
prevent us from benefitting from the new process.

We've lived with rules in process for extended periods without serious
side-effects.  I don't see why we need to suddenly allow rules procedures to
inhibit and deter all innovations.  Allowing for rule extensions to
accommodate new tools and process improvements should be an easy matter not
a grueling procedure.          :-)

Thanx, Buzz
Please note my contact info:
Dr. Everett O (Buzz) Rigsbee
IEEE-802 LMSC Meeting Manager
7750 80th Place SE
Mercer Island, WA  98040-5912
ph/fx: 206-236-2229
cell: 206-818-4978
SkypeID:  BRigsB
BRigsB@ieee.org

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-stds-802-sec@ieee.org [mailto:owner-stds-802-sec@ieee.org] On
Behalf Of Geoff Thompson
Sent: Friday, April 23, 2010 1:46 PM
To: Paul Nikolich
Cc: STDS-802-SEC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [802SEC] straw poll summary of on the question of interim EC
telecon meetings

Paul-

I think you have slightly mis-characterized the responses

I would characterize #2 as

2) Not necessarily a bad idea but orthogonal to the spirit and letter of
our rules.
Should not proceed until until the topic is tackled within the scope of
our rules change process

      Geoff

On 4/23/10 1:03 PM, Paul Nikolich wrote:

All,

So far the responses generally fall into two categories:

1) good idea, need to work out details, go for it
(Apurva, Buzz, Steve,  Bruce, Jon, JohnH, Subir, Mike)

2) not a bad idea, have concerns, proceed with caution
(Pat, Mat, Tony, James, Geoff, JohnL, David)

Any further opinions?  A few people (BobH, Roger, Mark) have yet to
weigh in.

Regards,

--Paul



----- Original Message ----- From: "Paul Nikolich"
<paul.nikolich@ATT.NET>
To:<STDS-802-SEC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG>
Sent: Friday, April 16, 2010 10:19 AM
Subject: [802SEC] straw poll on interim EC telecon meetings


Dear EC members,

I'd like to get your feedback on holding an EC meeting via
teleconference between plenary sessions (for example in the 1st week
of June, October and February).  My though is we'd hold a 2 hour
telecon to make decisions on time-critical items such as PAR
approvals, Sponsor Ballot initiation approvals, RevCom submissions, etc.

I'd make sure we'd have an agenda posted 30 days in advance an all
the materials necessary to make such decisions available for review
at least one week before the telecon.

Thoughts?  Please provide your feedback by 23APR.  I'll summarize the
feedback and if the response is positive, I'd like us to consider
holding the first such meeting 1pm-3pm ET Friday 04JUN2010.

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.

----------
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.