Thread Links | Date Links | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Thread Prev | Thread Next | Thread Index | Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index |
As far as I can tell, Tony only gave that opinion for a voter that had lost voting rights due to failure to vote on letter ballots. We just got our wires crossed for a bit with some answering for letter ballot
loss and some for attendance loss of voting rights. I think the current status of the debate is that we all believe that:
·
past attendance credit is void when one loses voting rights due to non-participation on letter ballots.
·
past attendance credit remains when one loses voting rights because of lack of attendance (i.e. one had attended 1 out of the last 4 meetings. Is there anyone that disagrees with that? And yes (responding to James and Geoff), the rules do give the chair to grant voting rights to someone who doesn’t meet the minimum requirements. I’ve done it myself for someone who missed more meetings than
allowed due to a health issue and I know of at least one case where a chair does it for someone who provides support to the Working Group but doesn’t travel to meetings. But IMO (and I make no claims to humbleness) those cases should be rare. The person I
granted rights to went on being unable to attend and wasn’t participating otherwise so when he didn’t attend again I didn’t extend his voting rights.
Regards, Pat From: ***** IEEE 802 Executive Committee List ***** [mailto:STDS-802-SEC@ieee.org]
On Behalf Of Stephens, Adrian P Hello Roger, To clarify, you are assuming the “soft landing” position. In this the member transitions from voter to aspirant, rather than voter to observer. On the “non ambiguity” front, a rule is IMHO ambiguous if apparently competent people come up with a different interpretation of that rule. Of course, individuals may declare the rule to be non-ambiguous, and their interpretation to be correct :0). Tony and myself read the rules to mean a “hard landing” (voter -> observer). So far the other respondents have read the rules to mean a soft landing. Does anybody else use the “hard landing” interpretation? I must admit I didn’t previously give it a lot of thought, but I think there is merit in the soft landing approach. Best Regards, Adrian P STEPHENS Office: +44 (1793) 404 825 Mobile: +44 (7920) 084900
USA Mobile: +1 (408) 239 7485 ---------------------------------------------- From: Roger Marks [mailto:r.b.marks@ieee.org]
Adrian,
---------- This email is sent from the 802 Executive Committee email reflector. This list is maintained by Listserv.
|