|Thread Links||Date Links|
|Thread Prev||Thread Next||Thread Index||Date Prev||Date Next||Date Index|
Thanks for your comments and suggestions. FYI, I started to add line numbers prior to issuing these ballots, but since the originals approved for ballot did not have them, I decided not to for now. Next time I submit documents for balloting approval I will include line numbers at the time of submittal.
I have tried using our balloting tools in the past. When I tried, some people used them, some people did not, and some developed their own format. It was such a mess and cost me so much extra time that I gave up. Using a balloting form also constrains the spontaneous dialogue we often have over each others comments. The current format allows all the dialogue to be captured which I feel would often be lost if a formal ballot form were used. I see that as a big negative. And for ballots on the scale that we do (15 people or so) I’m not sure a ballot form has much of an advantage over e-mails.
For now, e-mail responses with the title of the ballot being commented in the subject line is the proper format (as you have provided). We will compile all relevant content from such e-mails into a comments list. In your e-mail, simply reference the clause number of concern and the existing text in ballot, and comment or state what changes you desire. I find it’s not that hard to just cut and paste from the ballot to the e-mail. And frankly this is what we’ve been doing for the last several years so hopefully everyone is accustom to it. When developing a proposed resolution to the ballot we will parse the comments and develop the proposed resolution based on those comments.
Anyway, sorry for any inconvenience. I’m open to trying a balloting tool again if I get a commitment from the EC to actually use the tool.
Matthew Sherman, Ph.D.
From: Geoff Thompson
"WG meetings shall not be scheduled to coincide with the time of the tutorial programs."
should be changed to:
"Meetings of TAGs, Working Groups, or their sub-groups shall not be scheduled to overlap with the time of the tutorial programs."
On page 2 where it is proposed to remove the text that says:
"In the vote tally, Approve votes (and Abstain votes) include those votes that were initially Disapprove where the voter has accepted the resolution of the voter's comments and changed the vote to Approve (or Abstain). Disapprove votes include only those votes where some comment resolutions have not been accepted by the voter and the voter continues to disapprove."
I object to the removal, further I would like to add text that requires that any motion not accompanied by the required data will be removed from the agenda. Any approval granted to a motion that does not have the required data shall be reversed.
Dear EC members,