|Thread Links||Date Links|
|Thread Prev||Thread Next||Thread Index||Date Prev||Date Next||Date Index|
This is an outshoot from my WG initial membership interpretation effort. An issue I have heard raised a number of times from LMSC EC members is the question of what procedure should be followed for elections by 802.20 in July. Personally, I think it is inappropriate for us to “force” them to use a specific procedure. On the other hand, clearly people in 802.20 are wondering “what they can change” that would improve the chances of their officers being confirmed next time around. Based on reflector discussions to date, the election procedure itself seems to have been a concern at least to some EC members. Given that, I think it might make sense if we “recommend” a procedure that might address the concerns of these EC members. In my mind we could make a motion recommending a particular procedure, and have this presented to 802.20 at the upcoming interim. Mike Takefman has put forward the most detailed election procedure I have seen suggested to date. Extracting from one of Mike’s recent e-mails that procedure would be:
Everyone who attended 75% of the initial session gets to vote in
July. All consultants should declare who their client is. The
elections (and probably every other vote) should be by roll call.
The SEC should then analyze the results as both 1 organization 1
vote and straight and determine if any difference in result would
occur. If the vote is reverse on a 1 company 1 vote basis, then
that vote should be taken as final.
Personally, I’m okay with everything but the last step. From 184.108.40.206 of the LMSC P&P I believe the WG Chair’s job is to:
“Determine if the Working Group is dominated by an organization, and, if so, treat that organizations’ vote as one (with the approval of the Executive Committee).”
I’m not sure if the last step in Mike’s process is the best way to do that. What do other people think?