|Thread Links||Date Links|
|Thread Prev||Thread Next||Thread Index||Date Prev||Date Next||Date Index|
Disapprove. I agree with a number of the comments previously submitted.
1. 184.108.40.206, item 2 should only apply to active WG/TAGs. and consequently sub item a must be changed. It is less clear to me if the priviledge in sub item b should also be restricted to voting members of the EC (thus eliminating hibernating WG Chairs and the Member Emeritus) from being able to propose except through a voting member. In the case of hibernating members, based on experience, I favor the change (EC activity has been far too marginal in the past). I am less inclined because of no experience with the Member Emeritus and expectation of consistent and quality participation when Mr. Thompson is in that position). In gereral though, I am willing to trust the EC to squelch rules change noise that might come from the non-voting EC members of subitem b and therefore only require clarification on subitem a.
2. 220.127.116.11, second paragraph. This is ambiguous and could be considered to conflict with RROR and since precidence would apply, it would rule out a motion to reconsider without justification. Delete the paragraph.
3. Various -- in mulitple places, I see "members with voting rights" or similar text. All such clarifications would be removed and P&P maintenance would be simplified if 7.1.4 simply stated: "Only members of the EC with voting rights are counted in either the numerator or denominator in determinating the approval threshold for any EC vote. Unless specified otherwise in these P&P all EC votes are in addition subject to the following provisions. Voting is by simple majority of yea divided by yea plus nay. The quroum requirement is at least one-half of the Executive Committee voting members present. The Chair only votes to break ties."
Please note that is is consistent with our practice (e.g., the 0,0,12 vote where Paul cast the tie breaking vote but per this section, the vote should not have passed because of the 12 abstentions), but this is a change from the current rule which states "simple majority of members present". We might also consider if the last sentence is consistent with our practice where RROR allows the the chair to cast a deciding vote (different than breaking a tie). If this change is considered out of scope for the ballot I would recommend: "Only members of the EC with voting rights are counted in either the numerator or denominator in determinating the approval threshold for any EC vote. Unless specified otherwise in these P&P all EC votes are in addition subject to the following provisions. Voting is by simple majority of voting members present. The quroum requirement is at least one-half of the Executive Committee voting members present. The Chair only votes to break ties."
4. 18.104.22.168, second paragraph. Change to read "...shall require at least a two-thirds affirmative EC vote, and will ..." If my preferred change to 7.1.4 is rejected, I agree with Bob O'Hara's comment about removing "voting", if my change is accepted, Bob's change is unnecessary.
5. 22.214.171.124, second and third paragraphs. Effectivity of the change is ambiguous. If there is no opposition or comment must the change be presented for another ratifying vogte of the EC at a plenary? This paragraph could apply to the electronic vote of the first paragraph, not necessarily a meeting vote at the next plenary meeting. The thrid paragraph has a redundant sentence with the second paragraph.
6. 126.96.36.199 There needs to be some recourse when members of the EC question if a change was truly editorial, which can occur with formatting changes (e.g., changing prose into a list occasionally does this but might just be considered an editorial change.
From: owner-stds-802-sec@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG [mailto:owner-stds-802-sec@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG] On Behalf Of Sherman, Matthew J. (US SSA)
Sent: Saturday, January 01, 2005 5:48 AM
Subject: Re: [802SEC] +++ LMSC P&P Revision Ballot +++ P&P_Revision_Process
As a reminder, this ballot closes on Tuesday! So far I have received 1 approve vote, and no comments. Please take a little time to review this and forward any comments you might have to myself and the reflector.
[mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org] On Behalf Of Sherman, Matthew J. (US
Dear EC members,
Attached you will find the text for an LMSC P&P revision ballot on the LMSC P&P Revision Process. This ballot was approved at the Friday November 19, 2004 EC meeting. The text is identical to that presented at the meeting. The purpose and rationale for the ballot are as given in the attached ballot document.
Ballot Duration: 12/5/2004 - 1/5/2004 @ 11:59 PM EST
WG/TAG chairs, please distribute this P&P revision ballot to your groups, and invite them to comment through you.
Thanks & Regards,
Matthew Sherman, Ph.D.
Vice Chair, IEEE 802
Senior Member Technical Staff
BAE SYSTEMS, CNIR
Mail Stop 11B01
Office: +1 973.633.6344
Cell: +1 973.229.9520
Fax: +1 973.633.6004