sorry Paul, but that point was never made during the meeting and can't be
assumed to be part of anyone's decision yesterday. I certainly don't
agree with it. I believe that the decision was made for entirely
unsupportable reasons. The only point that was made regarding the
individuals elected by 802.20 was that they had not participated in the study
group, not that they had no experience in 802. Certainly, the elected
chair of 802.20 had previous experience in 802 and extensive experience in
other standards-making organizations. Your position is not a reflection
of the facts.
Regarding the decision of the SEC not to affirm the elections of
802.20, there was no evidence presented of any irregular procedures,
failure to follow published procedures, or irregularity in the voting.
My position, as I stated at the SEC meeting, is that all procedures were
followed scrupulously and the elections, which I observed as an SEC
member, were without protest by any person present at the 802.20
meeting. As far as I can tell, the decision not to affirm was made
on the unsupported allegations of two individual participants in 802.20.
Are we prepared to invalidate every other working group decision that requires
SEC affirmation with the same level of evidence, i.e., two allegations
unsupported by any evidence?
Indeed, no concrete guidance was provided to the appointed interim
chair of 802.20 on how not to wind up in exactly the same situation when the
next elections are held. Is the SEC prepared to affirm the elections, if
the same candidates are nominated and elected at the July meeting? Is a
single 802 meeting experience enough? If not, where is it written in our
Policies and Procedures (formerly our Rules) that you have to have some
number of meetings under your belt before you can become an officer of a
can't support the opinion you offered as to why the election of the officers
was not affirmed by the SEC. If asked, I will offer my own, quite
People will want to know why the SEC did not
affirm the 802.20 officer candidates presented to at the closing plenary
meeting. I have already had two inquiries. In my
view, the decision was made because the candidates were not
qualified due to lack of experience in 802.