| Thread Links | Date Links | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thread Prev | Thread Next | Thread Index | Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index |
Hi Adrian,Unfortunately it's not always that simple with the algorithm we use. It is possible for a nearly member to become a voting member at the beginning of a plenary and attend less them 75% of that session and lose their newly gained voting rights at the close of that plenary. Hence they would become an observer not an aspirant.
What I'm saying is that there is no need for a special loss clause for non-attendance. We simply always apply the algorithm to determine a person's status, which may fluctuate from session to session.
-Rick AlfvinSent from my iPhone 5s---------- This email is sent from the 802 Executive Committee email reflector. This list is maintained by Listserv.Hello Geoffrey and all,
These changes are an improvement to clarity. But they still don’t explicitly address the loss due to non-attendance.
The “Loss” subclause is related solely to loss by non-return of ballots, but the heading implies its scope is broader than that.
Also we should cover the commonest case first.
IMHO the “Loss” subclause should state:
1. Loss due to non-attendance results in transition to aspirant (1 attendance in last 4 plenaries/interims) or non-voter (no attendances in last 4 plenaries/interims)
2. Loss due to non-return of ballots results in transition to observer and loss of attendances.
3. Loss due to non-payment of registration results in transition to observer and loss of attendances.
Or it should narrow its scope in the heading.
Best Regards,
Adrian P STEPHENS
Tel: +44 (1793) 404825 (office)
Tel: +44 (7920) 084 900 (mobile, UK)Tel: +1 (408) 2397485 (mobile, USA)
----------------------------------------------
Intel Corporation (UK) Limited
Registered No. 1134945 (England)
Registered Office: Pipers Way, Swindon SN3 1RJ
VAT No: 860 2173 47
From: ***** IEEE 802 Executive Committee List ***** [mailto:STDS-802-SEC@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Geoff Thompson
Sent: 22 February 2014 23:30
To: STDS-802-SEC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [802SEC] WG membership rules
James, Colleagues-
I never thought that there was a problem with the rules as stated, but then my tenure as chair was back when we were less concerned about cross-WG uniformity of rules and such items were more at the hands of individual WG Chairs.
I have just reviewed the relevant WG P&P text, to wit:
7.2.2. Retention
Membership is retained by participating in at least two of the last four plenary sessions. One duly constituted recent interim WG or task group session may be substituted for one of the two plenary sessions.
7.2.3. Loss
Excepting recirculation letter ballots membership may be lost if two of the last three WG letter ballots are not returned, or are returned with an abstention for other than “lack of technical expertise.” This rule may be excused by the WG Chair if the individual is otherwise an active participant. If lost per this subclause, membership is re-established as if the person were a new candidate member.
I believe that it could be improved and more clearly meet what I believe are the intentions with the following changes. I believe these changes are only changes in wording, not intended meaning:
7.2.2. Retention
Membership is retained by participating
byas indicated by the required level of registered attendance in at least two of the last four plenary sessions and by participating in WG letter ballots.ORegistered attendance at one duly constituted recent interim WG or task group session may be substituted for one of the two plenary sessions.
7.2.3. Loss
Excepting recirculation letter ballots membership may be lost if two of the last three WG letter ballots are not returned, or are returned with an abstention for other than “lack of technical expertise.” This rule may be excused by the WG Chair if the individual is otherwise an active participant. If lost per this subclause, membership participation credit by attendance is reset to zero.
is re-established as if the person were a new candidate member.
Best regards,
Geoff
On Feb 22, 2014, at 11:23 AM, James P. K. Gilb wrote:
All
As I thought about this on Friday, I came to a similar conclusion as Roger.
Under 7.2.1, the individual in question has achieved "participation credit" for July 2013 and January 2014. AFAIK, there is no controversy concerning that conclusion.
So, the only question is this: What are the situations under which "participation credit" for a session can be removed?
I know of only two (thanks Jon for finding the other one):
IEEE LMSC OM 5.4 - Due to failure to "comply with the registration requirements for that session, and further has not complied with those requirements within 60 days after the end of the session, including payment of any required registration fees,"
IEEE LMSC WG P&P 7.2.3 - If 'two of the last three WG letter ballots are not returned, or are returned with an abstention for other than “lack of technical expertise.”'
I can find no other rule that allows a WG to take away participation credit earned for a session.
James Gilb
On 02/21/2014 01:53 PM, Roger Marks wrote:
Adrian,
As I understand, you are discussing membership retention and loss based
only on participation. In other words, your question presumes that the
individual has met all other obligations (balloting, fees, ...). I'll
share my views based on that understanding.
Subclause 7.2.1 states the conditions for establishing membership. An
individual who meets those conditions has a right to be granted
membership. The rules do not provide for WG officials to override the
individual's membership rights; for example, by declaring that some
session participation will be ignored on the grounds that the individual
has recently lost membership.
I don't see any ambiguity on this in the rules.
Regards,
Roger
Stephens, Adrian P <mailto:Adrian.P.Stephens@INTEL.COM>
21 February 2014 12:34 AM
Dear SEC,
If you are responsible for maintaining voting status for your WG,
please respond to the
question at the end of this email.
A query by an 802.11 member causes me to question how I've interpreted
the WG P&P regarding
loss of membership through non-attendance.
The WG P&P State: (my highlight)
7.2.2. Retention
Membership is retained by participating in at least two of the last
four plenary sessions. One duly
constituted interim WG or task group session may be substituted for
one of the two plenary
sessions.
7.2.3. Loss
Excepting recirculation letter ballots membership may be lost if two
of the last three WG letter
ballots are not returned, or are returned with an abstention for other
than "lack of technical
expertise." This rule may be excused by the WG Chair if the individual
is otherwise an active
participant. If lost per this subclause, membership is re-established
as if the person were a new
candidate member.
It describes how to retain membership by participation, but does not
state what happens
if the member fails to maintain membership. In the case of failure
to return ballots, it is
explicit that the member is reset as though a new member.
So, the rules are ambiguous. You could interpolate a rule similar
to the highlighted case
for non-attendance (which I have unconsciously done in 802.11). In
doing so, I am following
previous 802.11 vice chairs' interpretation.
We have a member with the following attendances
03 2013 - No (plenary)
05 2013 - No (interim)
07 2013 - Yes (plenary)
09 2013 - No (interim)
11 2013 - No (plenary) (loses voting rights)
01 2013 - Yes (interim)
03 2013 - Yes (plenary)
According to the "everything reset" interpretation, the member is an
aspirant at the
start of march. According to the "2 in last 4 plenaries, regardless
of loss of voting rights in this period"
interpretation, he is a potential voter.
The implication of the "does not reset" interpretation is that a
member never transitions to non-member
directly, but always transitions first to aspirant. And then later
transitions to non-member.
IMHO, your working groups must be operating one of the following two
rules:
1.Resets to non-member, loses previous attendances
2.Reverts to aspirant, keeps previous attendances for future gain to
voting member.
Please let me know of these rule you are operating. If it turns out
we're all doing the same thing, we should
put that in the WG P&P.
Best Regards,
Adrian P STEPHENS
Tel: +44 (1793) 404825 (office)
Tel: +44 (7920) 084 900 (mobile, UK)
Tel: +1 (408) 2397485 (mobile, USA)
----------------------------------------------
Intel Corporation (UK) Limited
Registered No. 1134945 (England)
Registered Office: Pipers Way, Swindon SN3 1RJ
VAT No: 860 2173 47
---------- 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.