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

Re: [802SEC] 802 O&A balloting proposal

Thanks Bob for the correction.  I was thinking that comments from non-voters were "outside the ballot" and so rogue.  I prefer your view ��.

There are several things in the CSD that need to be revised based on actual practice.  That's another thread ��.

Ben
From: ***** IEEE 802 Executive Committee List ***** <STDS-802-SEC@listserv.ieee.org> on behalf of ROBERT GROW <bobgrow@COX.NET>
Sent: Tuesday, October 4, 2022 6:25 PM
To: STDS-802-SEC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG <STDS-802-SEC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG>
Subject: Re: [802SEC] 802 O&A balloting proposal
 
Ben, 

The thread has forked, but I have to respond.  Geoff’s proposal is not advocating that the 802.1 Chair “zap” anyone with voting rights.  The proposal from Geoff was to grant 802.1 membership to a member (voter) of another 802 WG upon request.  My email with greater explanation proposes a way, using current rules, to grant 802.1 membership to those that request participation in the P802 WG ballot.  The qualification for the 802.1 Chair to do so is that the 802 O&A is relevant to all WGs.  (Doesn’t our CSD ask about compliance with the O&A?) Further, enabling and encouraging broad participation on the Std 802 revision would enable greater participation from experts in the different WGs that should be striving for compliance with the Q&A to better address the needs the different MACs being specified in our WGs.  (I thought I read in you Workshop summary that this was a continuing item for work.

My previous post (separate fork of the thread) largely agrees with your last paragraph about the questionable value of a vote on P802.  I would though suggest that you have a significant error.  WG ballot process is to be consistent with SA ballot process specified in the SA Operations Manual (LMSC OM).  To me that means that comments received before ballot close shall be considered (SASB OM).  (It isn’t optional as you write below!)

—Bob

On Oct 4, 2022, at 5:56 PM, Benjamin Rolfe <ben@BLINDCREEK.COM> wrote:

I have to agree with James on this.  The normal route to being a voter is not trivial, and empowering the chair to decide to zap that on a whim is not a good idea, not what the rules say and not a reasonable interpretation of our current rules if you look at the entire topic of voting rights.   Allowing the chair to grant rights makes sense and makes sense for cases such as where a person has made significant contributions without meeting the specific criteria set out in the rules.  

The problem is we're trying to provide a limited time offer, just for this ballot series, voting rights. We don't have anything in our rules for this contingency, but...

Another way to look at it is "what are we really trying to accomplish?".  We want broad contribution, participation and thorough review of the draft by all 802 WGs.  Are votes really the important part?  Our rules allow anyone to submit comments on a WG ballot, regardless of status.  The rules allow the group to consider such comments.  The WG chair can even mandate a group consider ALL comments (IMO all groups should all the time). Once we work out the logistics (draft availability, awareness, comment submission) then, we advertise the activity, make it open to all (within the discretion of the WG/TG/TF chair to decree), listen, accept comments from all participants during balloting.  If a non-voter thinks they would have disapproved had they a vote, communicate this clearly to the TG/TF and then deal with it just as seriously as if the comment(s) came from a negative voter.   As a "but you really did not listen to me" contingency, everyone who wants a stake can join the SA ballot pool and vote NO there if the feel the need.  We need not get into a complicated rules change (or even a simple rules change), we shake hands and do the right thing because (a) the rules allow doing the right thing, and (b) we all know that it's the right thing.

Just a thought FWIW.
Ben



From: ***** IEEE 802 Executive Committee List ***** <STDS-802-SEC@listserv.ieee.org> on behalf of James P. K. Gilb <000008e8b69871c2-dmarc-request@listserv.ieee.org>
Sent: Tuesday, October 4, 2022 4:21 PM
To: STDS-802-SEC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG <STDS-802-SEC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG>
Subject: Re: [802SEC] 802 O&A balloting proposal
 
All

Geoff's interpretation would allow the WG Chair, for any reason, to
remove any voting member's voting rights. I don't see any interpretation
of the rules that allow that.  Allowing the WG Chair to confer voting
rights does not, by extension, allow the WG Chair to remove them.
(quotes from the WG P&P below).

Glenn

I wasn't suggesting making the subgroup members voting members of IEEE
802.1.  I was hoping IEEE 802.1 could form a comment resolution subgroup
and declare the voting membership for that group.

However, on further review, Membership in the subgroup is granted to any
Member of the WG (mall WG embers are voting members).  The non-WG
members are allowed to "participate", which would imply not voting or
acting as voting members, but only acting as participants.

So that doesn't solve it either.  We would need to change the rules (we
can't suspend the P&P or WG P&P).


Reference: what the WG P&P says about membership (excerpted):

4.2. Voting Membership

...

Membership may be declared at the discretion of the Working Group Chair
(e.g., for contributors by correspondence or other significant
contributions to the Working Group). The Working Group Chair may
authorize Credited Attendance for individuals while on activities
approved by the Working Group Chair.

..



4.4 Review of Membership

Membership privileges may be lost through persistent violation of the
fundamental principles of standards development or disregard of
standards of conduct (see Clause 1 of these P&P).

The Chair shall review the list of voting members at least annually.
Voting members are expected to fulfill the requirements of active
participation as defined in Clause 4. When a voting member does not meet
these obligations, the Chair shall consider the matter for appropriate
action, which may include a change in membership status and the loss of
voting rights.

The Chair may “specially maintain” a voting member’s status that would
otherwise be lost by failing to meet their obligations. Reasons for such
an action might include consideration of personal hardship, medical
emergency or outstanding contributions.



On 10/4/22 14:46, Geoff Thompson wrote:
>   Folks-
> The Lord giveth and the Lord taketh away.
> My interpretation of the chair's right to grant voting membership to a WG presumes the right to undo what he has done.Since that explicit right is neither granted nor forbidden, I believe it is a matter of interpretation.That would make it a matter for a ruling by the chair (WG or EC?).Since those added by the chair presumably do not have a sufficient attendance record, I would argue that they could be deleted at the next general purge for lack of attendance.
> Solutions: - A ruling by the chair (lacking evidence to the contrary) that those added by the chair can be deleted by the same standards of and subject to an ordinary regular purge. - A ruling by the EC Chair that addition for only a specific ballot group is permissible. - Other?
> Geoff
>
>      On Tuesday, October 4, 2022, 01:25:55 PM PDT, Glenn Parsons <00000f6f9e80d40c-dmarc-request@listserv.ieee.org> wrote:
>  
>   James,
>
> One concern with the proposal is that the group of voters added to the 802.1 WG so that they would be in the P802REVc pool, will be voters until they age out.
> No. The WG Balloting Group is set for all time at the start of Initial WG Ballot. If a person gains or loses 802.1 voting rights after that start, it has no effect on the membership of the project ballot group. [In the same way that for "Sponsor Ballot" death is just a change of address.]
>
> You confirmed that the WG chair can add voters but not remove them.  During this time they will also become voters in other WG ballots that are started.  And will result in quorum issues (if the group is large).
>
> Is there anyway to mitigate this without a rule change?
>
> Cheers,
> Glenn.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ***** IEEE 802 Executive Committee List ***** <STDS-802-SEC@listserv.ieee.org> On Behalf Of James P. K. Gilb
> Sent: Tuesday, October 4, 2022 4:05 PM
> To: STDS-802-SEC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
> Subject: Re: [802SEC] 802 O&A balloting proposal
>
> All
>
> Based on the rules I have found, it is theoretically possible for IEEE
> 802.1 to form a subgroup as a comment resolution group and "allow participation of persons who are not Working Group Members and specify the terms and conditions under which they participate in the subgroup."
>
> Note that the 802.1 WG could delegate responsibility for resolution to the subgroup.  ("Any resolution of a subgroup shall be subject to confirmation by the Working Group, unless previously or otherwise delegated to the subgroup.").
>
> IMHO.
>
> James Gilb
>
> IEEE-SA Standards Board OM
>
> 5.4.3 Conduct of the standards balloting process
>
> ...
>
> The Standards Committee shall ensure that comment resolution occurs via a comment resolution group, which is a subgroup of the working group.
>
> ...
>
> JPKG NOTE: The preceding is for SA ballot.
>
> IEEE 802 LMSC WG P&P
>
> 5. Subgroups of the Working Group
>
> The Working Group may form subgroups for the conduct of its business.
> Membership in the subgroup is granted to any Member of the Working Group. Such formation shall be explicitly noted in the meeting minutes.
> At the time of formation, the Working Group shall determine the scope and duties delegated to the subgroup, may decide to allow participation of persons who are not Working Group Members and specify the terms and conditions under which they participate in the subgroup. Such formation shall be explicitly noted in the meeting minutes. Any changes to the scope and duties of the subgroup will require the approval of the Working Group. Any resolution of a subgroup shall be subject to confirmation by the Working Group, unless previously or otherwise delegated to the subgroup.
>
> The Chair of the Working Group shall appoint, and may dismiss, the Chair of the subgroup.
>
> On 10/4/22 12:14, Geoff Thompson wrote:
>> As to be discussedSee attached
>>
>>
>> ----------
>> 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.

To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-SEC list, click the following link: https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-SEC&A=1


To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-SEC list, click the following link: https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-SEC&A=1

To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-SEC list, click the following link: https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-SEC&A=1