RE: [802SEC] +++EC Motion+++ Rules Change Ballot on Roll Call Votes
I vote approve with essentially the same comments as Bob. In addition I suggest that the question of technical vs procedural votes should be considered in comment resolution. I do not think role call votes should be restricted to technical votes. However I am concerned that if a 25% threshold were in place, an inference might be drawn that the rule only applies to technical votes since procedural only require 50% to pass.
Matthew Sherman, PhD
Senior Member Technical Staff
BAE SYSTEMS, CNIR
Office: +1 973.633.6344
From: Grow, Bob [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
Sent: Monday, December 29, 2003 2:48 PM
To: Mike Takefman; email@example.com
Subject: RE: [802SEC] +++EC Motion+++ Rules Change Ballot on Roll Call
I will admit to ambivalence on this rules change, both before and after
reviewing all the arguments. That said, I will vote approve.
Since I probably will not be able to attend comment resolution:
I would support an increase in the threshold to >25% per Mike's email.
I support Geoff's (and Bill's) grammatical improvement.
I would not be opposed to Bill's recommended rewording. (I believe the
"protection" of using roll calls as a delaying tactic is supportive of
the Chair's responsibility to progress the standard, but find it of
little practical value.)
> -----Original Message-----
> From: firstname.lastname@example.org [mailto:owner-stds-802-
> email@example.com] On Behalf Of Mike Takefman
> Sent: Monday, November 24, 2003 8:34 PM
> To: firstname.lastname@example.org
> Subject: [802SEC] +++EC Motion+++ Rules Change Ballot on Roll Call
> Dear EC Members,
> as per the motion at the November Plenary closing
> EC meeting I am starting a (35 day) ballot on
> the proposed rule change. I am extending the ballot
> to account for the upcoming US Thanksgiving holiday
> (and yes Canada has such a holiday - its just a month
> I will be running a face to face comment resolution session
> during the January Interim Session to try to finalize
> the language. I believe sunday night is the best time
> to hold such a meeting, but I am open to other suggestions.
> The language you will find enclosed is different (and
> I believe improved) from what was shown at the EC meeting.
> 1) It attempts to provide better sentence structure
> (less of a run-on sentence).
> 2) It addresses an issue brought up to me personally
> by one of the 2 dissenting voters to the rules change
> motion in terms of insuring that roll call votes cannot
> be used as a delaying tactic.
> Personally, I have only seen roll call votes used in dot17
> sparingly and they have in fact helped me determine when a group
> was attempting to block concensus / progress. As such, there
> has never been an issue with their use as a delay tactic,
> but I do have sympathy for such a concern.
> Michael Takefman email@example.com
> Distinguished Engineer, Cisco Systems
> Chair IEEE 802.17 Stds WG
> 3000 Innovation Dr, Ottawa, Canada, K2K 3E8
> voice: 613-254-3399 cell:613-220-6991