RE: [802SEC] Fwd: Gleaned from another group
I agree with the
principle that Lowell states as far as concensus being the important thing in
the process. However, I don't agree with the way Robert's rules is characterized
I have found that
sensibly used, Robert's rules can be very helpful in getting to concensus with
reasonable efficiency. In small stable groups (and if I recall correctly up
until July the 802.1 voting membership was running with a fairly stable set of
10-15 voters), one can get along with out it.
In large groups (say
more than 50 or so), it is sometimes difficult to determine concensus without
votes. I have heard the discussion in 802.3 or its task forces sometimes sound
like the group is leaning one way and the vote count comes out the opposite.
Sometimes this is because only a small percentage of the room is vocal and
sometimes it is because people want to air their concerns before they vote. Once
the concerns have been talked through they are okay with voting for the
When we started
10BASE-T and suddenly had more than 100 people at task force meetings, we had to
change to use Robert's Rules to move things along with efficiency. Well used, it
is a tool to keep the meeting on track and to determine when you have
The important thing
is to keep in mind what the goal is and not get so tied up in the rules that you
lose sight of the goal. We have groups that are examples of applying Robert's
Rules to generate successful standards relatively quickly with
broad concensus with a size of group that others find scary. 802.1 WG
voting membership is growing now and you may find you need to adjust process to
work with a larger group.
Absolutely. This is exactly why we don't
take votes in 802.1 WG meetings.
11/08/2003 -0700, Geoff Thompson wrote:
Just saw this
go by in a different (different fro what you may ask??) context...
reminded me that the true power for putting forth successful standards is
that they are consensus standards, not just that we can get material through
(Emphasis below is added by
From: "Lowell Johnson"
To: "'Donald Heirman'"
Subject: RE: pro-vote Voting task
force from ProCom
Date: Sun, 10 Aug 2003 13:16:55
Don and others;
I think Don's comments are
really leading up to a very simple concept:
you can't legislate common
sense, which is basically what the consensus
process is. I have
often told people that if they are worrying about
or any other sort of artificial control, they obviously
do not have
Perhaps it would be easier to control what
they should not do. However,
I personally think this would also be just
as murky as Don suggested.
Maybe the best we (as IEEE) can do is
require adherence to rigid rules
of openness and due process, then
streamline the process for appeals to
deal with the simple issues
| Vice Chair, IEEE
| Nortel Networks, Inc. M/S: P79/06/B04 |
| 4655 Great
| P. O. Box
| Santa Clara, CA 95052-8185
| Phone: +1 408 495
| Fax: +1 408 495
| Please see the IEEE 802 web page at |