All
I have reviewed the potential issue with member vs. non-voting member
and voting member.
In 4.3, it says N/A for non-voting member, hence WGs only have voting
members, there is no other class of member.
I could add a clarification to 4.2, by adding "All Working Group Members
are voting members."
4.2 Voting Membership
Working Group membership is by individual. All Working Group Members are
voting members. Those attending Sessions shall pay any required Session
fees if established. Participants seeking Working Group membership are
responsible for fulfilling the requirements to gain and maintain
membership.
Now, if a WG wants different sub-classes of participants (e.g.,
aspirant) or voting member (e.g., member in doom or member in peril),
then they can do that in their Operations Manual.
So, I am suggesting the above change, plus the editorial changes on
slide 10 of ec-21-0287-02, leave in "Although not a requirement for
membership in the Working Group, participants are encouraged to join the
IEEE, IEEE SA and the IEEE Computer Society."
In 4.6 Working Group Participant list:
Change "except temporarily when required to edit or update the list."
To be:
"except temporarily during the time required to use, edit or update the
list,"
as we discussed in the closing meeting.
I am going to update the proposed document and start an early close
ballot tonight (as authorized during our closing meeting).
James Gilb
On 11/17/21 7:59 PM, ROBERT GROW wrote:
James,
Since you have designated me as your spelling and grammar checker, I
have a few non-substantive comments of that sort. BUT, I also have other
comments that might cause EC members to conclude the WG P&P is not ready
for submittal again.
General — There are a lot of brackets which makes inclusion of the text
ambiguous. The instructions say to either remove the bracketed text
(assume including the brackets), or remove the brackets if used, this
hasn’t been done.
Page 6, 1.5 — "An Interim Session is set of meetings...” grammar
correction to "An Interim Session is a set of meetings…"
Page 7, 1.5 — "A Session is collection of …” grammar correction to "A
Session is a collection of …”
Page 11, 3.2.5,a) — Readability would be improved if the run-on sentence
is broken up, but I note the problem is AudCom’s from making the lettered
list phrases rather than sentences. The ending "Second Vice Chair does .”
left me thinking “does what?”. Perhaps replace “does” with “takes over”
for consistency with the First Vice Chair text.
Now for a few substantive issues!
Page 4, 1.5 — There is a baseline problem that complicates the
document. All participants must be either a member or non-member, but
there is nothing in the baseline that defines any rights or other status
except they can’t vote. In the past, IEEE legal has given us the
interpretation that a subscriber to a reflector is a participant. I hope
this remains true. Unfortunately the Baseline P&P use italics in 1.5 to
define non-member, member, voting member, and non-voting member. (This
makes the word “member” ambiguous in some cases in both AudCom and our
text, and this use of italics differs from other terms that are capitalized
(e.g., “Chair”). Uncapitalized (i.e., no italics) is appropriate for “IEEE
SA member” and other members that aren’t referring to WG membership, so
AudCom use of capitals for the terms would improve the baseline.
I think we would be better off if we could change the 1.5 definition of
terms. For us, Members are a subset of Participants, and I don’t know of
any reason we want to identify a group which is non-member participants.
Similarly, I have trouble with the need for a definition for non-voting
members (yes I noted 4.3).
Enough whinging about the baseline. What is wrong with the current
baseline WG P&P text and the 1.5 definitions of member being either voting
or non-voting:
3.5.4,h) — So non-member participants can’t get the list of voting
members? Why? Why isn’t this the WG membership list of 4.7, shouldn’t all
participants be able to know all other participants affiiiations? (Oops
this is baseline issue, but still is related to the problem of the 1.5
definition separating Members into non-voting members and voting members
and perhaps some on AudCom having trouble separating “members” from being a
synonym for “voting member".)
4.2, first paragraph — The first use of “membership” appears to be
correct, the others should be “voting membership".
4.2, third and fourth paragraphs — All occurrences of “membership”
should be “voting membership”.
4.2, 6th paragraph, last sentence — This is misleading. Perhaps add at
the end “without payment of a per ballot fee”.
4.2, 8th paragraph — “Membership” should be "Voting membership”.
4.2, 9th paragraph — All occurrences of “membership” should be “voting
membership”.
4.2.1, 1st paragraph — “Membership” should be "Voting membership”.
4.2.1, 3rd paragraph — “member (i.e., has voting rights)” should use the
defined term voting member
4.2.1, 5th through 8th paragraphs — all occurrences of “member” or
“membership” without the qualifier “voting” should have that qualifier.
12 — All forms of “member” should be “voting member”
14, second paragraph — “members” should be “voting members”
4.6 and 4.7 — I have a practical problem with both the position of
Yvette, and the text. I find three lists used in the P&P: WG Voting
Member list (3.4.5,h), WG Participant List (4.6), and WG Membership list
(4.7). An example of a practical problem is Direct Vote Live. As I
understand, it uses email addresses in validating who is allowed to vote,
and that has to be populated to use the tool. Email addresses are only
included on the WG Participant List, and there is no exemption for using
keeping any of the PII contained in the WG Participant List for any purpose
except for updating the list. This means that volunteers cannot
practically run a tool the uses any of the PII in the WG Participant List.
This makes things less secure than using the WG Membership List. But The
WG Membership List does not even information to separate voting members and
non-voting members per the definitions of 1.5. How does the Secretary
fulfill their duty in 3.5.4,h when the Membership List.
It seems to me that this is mostly a baseline problem. Would AudCom
allow extraction of voting status of members from the Participant list to
create the voting member list? Would AudCom (contrary to the instructions)
allow voting status of members to be included as item c)? Would AudCom be
willing to change 3.5.4,h) to reference the WG Membership list instead of
creating a third list? Would IEEE SA Risk Management recognize the
practical need to use a subset of the PII to keep our process with
electronic tools both practical and a secure implementation of more
cumbersome methods for doing things like roll call voting.
—Bob
On Nov 16, 2021, at 11:28 AM, James P. K. Gilb <
000008e8b69871c2-dmarc-request@ieee.org> wrote:
All
I have uploaded the proposed WG P&P. It can be found at:
https://mentor.ieee.org/802-ec/dcn/21/ec-21-0280-00-00EC-proposed-ieee-802-lmsc-wg-p-p.doc
We had some discussion prior to approving it before about not storing
the the Working Group Participant List on non IEEE hardware. The
compromise we came up with was:
"except temporarily when required to edit or update the list."
The AudCom reviewers pointed out that "temporarily" is ill-defined.
I have suggested changing it to:
"except temporarily during the time required to edit or update the
list,"
Yvette has suggested:
"except temporarily during the time required to edit or update the list
if the list is not on a system that automatically stores the data to a
non-IEEE system, and the information is deleted immediately after use."
This topic generated a fair amount of discussion before, so in the
interest of keeping our closing meeting shorter, I would invite comments on
the text via email. It seems reasonable to assume that there is better
wording available.
As a reminder, there is a new proposed Operations Manual for which I
will ask for a vote at the closing. Please review and comment. I have
some editorial corrections from Bob Grow (I don't need spell check or
grammar check, I have Bob).
In particular, I changed "IEEE 802 LMSC Interim Teleconference Meeting"
to be "IEEE 802 LMSC Interim Electronic Meeting" to match the term in our
P&P. I think I have used and capitalized it correctly in the OM. I also
capitalized Interim Session and Plenary Session as they are now defined
terms in our WG P&P.
Take a look, you can find the updated proposed version at:
https://mentor.ieee.org/802-ec/dcn/21/ec-21-0169-04-00EC-proposed-om.odt
James Gilb
----------
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.