Thread Links Date Links
Thread Prev Thread Next Thread Index Date Prev Date Next Date Index

Re: [802SEC] Quorum Rules in IEEE 802


	Thanks that helps.  So the chair is responsible to determine a
quorum at the beginning of the meeting in what ever way he deems
appropriate, and then a quorum is assumed after that unless proven
otherwise by a quorum call that fails.  And all work up to that point is
considered valid.  That works for me.  Of course that is all just
guidance since Roberts Rules is guidance for 802.

	You are correct I am not suggesting another P&P change just an
email discussion, as we just had.  I am sure you have other P&P changes
in mind since I believe we have a call in a few days on that topic.

	I was not at the meeting you referred to but I did hear the


-----Original Message-----
From: Sherman, Matthew J. (US SSA)
Sent: Saturday, September 24, 2005 7:12 PM
To: Shellhammer, Steve;
Subject: RE: Quorum Rules in IEEE 802


You have omitted one key quote:

In Ch. XI, Section 40 under "Manner of Enforcing the Quorum Requirement"
it states:

	'When the chair has called a meeting to order after finding that
a quorum is present, the continued presence of a quorum is presumed
unless the chair or a member notices that a quorum is no longer

However I will go further to justify my stance and state that:


At least I don't know of any.  Our rules say a quorum must be present,
but don't say how the presence is determined.  Determining a quorum is a
non-technical matter.  Therefore (in the absence of a specific rule) it
is up to the chair to decide how to determine if a quorum is present.
All the guidance we are citing from Roberts is just that - Guidance.
None of it is binding.  The question is completely and totally up to the

Now while I don't think you asked this, it could be suggested that we
clarify the 802 rules on interim quorum.  However I have found that for
any rule we can define, we can always find a loophole and ambiguity.
Further I suggest you ask yourself the following:

Do you check for the presence of a quorum before every vote?  Do you
think it is reasonable to check for a quorum before every vote? Do you
even check prior to the opening of each meeting? 

My suggestion is that with regard to an interim quorum, our rules are
clear enough, and that we leave it be.  Explictly requiring more could
have substantial administrative impact - particularly on our larger
groups.  The chair determines the quorum, and it is completely up to him
how.  Unless challenged, he may presume one if he likes.  There is
nothing in our rules that prevent this.  I believe that formalizing
additional rules will simply lead to additional complexity with an even
greater risk of more loopholes and patches to the rules.

Hope that helps.


PS - 

As an aside, there was one occasion I can recall (perhaps you were
there) where at the closing meeting of a WG interim, someone called for
a quorum.  Of course many people like to skip out early, and a quorum
was not present.  The WG was unsure how to proceed and basically closed
down the meeting (a quorum was unachievable at that point) leaving many
important motions and much WG business unattended to.  It was a mess.
One person had completely killed a critical meeting using this tactic.
(I think because they needed to leave early or something).  As I recall
all business conducted before the point of the quorum call was presumed
valid.  I don't believe any rules changes occurred based on the events.
However after much research I think the WG leadership decided on the
following basic guidance should the situation reoccur (if anyone wishes
to correct me on any of these matters feel free):

	If a quorum is called and not present: 
		Continue transacting business anyway
		Don't shut down the meeting		
		Business conducted prior to the quorum call is
considered valid
		Decisions after the quorum call must be affirmed by the
			Either use the reflector or at the next plenary
	Only follow the process above if a quorum is challenged
		Otherwise assume a quorum is present

Matthew Sherman, Ph.D.
Senior Member Technical Staff
Office: +1 973.633.6344

-----Original Message-----
From: Shellhammer, Steve [] 
Sent: Saturday, September 24, 2005 7:25 PM
To: Sherman, Matthew J. (US SSA);
Subject: Quorum Rules in IEEE 802


	I would like to clarify the quorum rules in IEEE 802.

	I changed the subject line of this email since it is not
specifically regarding the recent 802.18 meeting, but the rules for 802
in general.

	I have also heard the rumor that "if no one asks a quorum is
assumed."  However, I have not been able to locate any text stating

	I did some searching in Roberts Rules to see what I could find.
I did find the following,

Call to Order; Order of Business
When the time of a meeting has arrived, the presiding officer opens it,
after he has determined that a quorum is present, by calling the meeting
to order. He takes the chair (that is, occupies the presiding officer's
station in the hall), waits or signals for quiet, and, while standing,
announces in a clear voice, "The meeting will come to order," or, "The
meeting will be in order."

	This says the one of the tasks for the presiding officer is to
determine if a quorum is present.

	Under "Adoption of a Motion or Action Without a Motion, by
Unanimous (or General) Consent" it says,

Whenever it is stated in this book that a certain action or the adoption
of a certain motion "requires a two-thirds vote," the same action can,
in principle, also be taken by unanimous consent. If much hinges on the
outcome, however, it is usually better to take a formal vote. Action by
unanimous consent requires the presence of a quorum, just as for the
transaction of business by any other method.

	So once again it looks like quorum is required.  Robert Rules
even says that,

The prohibition against transacting business in the absence of a quorum
cannot be waived even by unanimous consent, and a notice (pp. 116-18)
cannot be validly given.

	So it looks like any motion to wave a quorum is invalid.

	So I have been unable to locate any text in Robert Rules stating
that "If no one asks a quorum is assumed."

	So my conclusion is that it is the responsibility of the chair
to determine if a quorum exists before transacting formal business at an
interim session.

	Please tell me if you can find any rules contrary to this.


-----Original Message-----
From: Sherman, Matthew J. (US SSA)
Sent: Saturday, September 24, 2005 6:21 AM
Subject: Re: [802SEC] Five day approval process

The decision is Paul's, but for the record .....

I believe the issue here is not whether a quorum is required (it is
required by the 802. P&P and I don't believe you can over rule that with
a motion) but under what condition is a quorum assumed.  In the absence
of a record that show a quorum was or was not present, the fact that the
meeting and vote was held implies a quorum. This should only be called
into question at the time of the vote, not after the fact.  I believe
this is consistent with the guidance in Roberts Rules, and to do
otherwise would greatly impact some of our larger groups who must take
many votes at interims and should not be required to prove presence of a
quorum at every vote.  It should only be if that quorum is questioned at
the time of the vote.

Just my 2 cents...


Matthew Sherman, Ph.D.
Senior Member Technical Staff
Office: +1 973.633.6344

This email is sent from the 802 Executive Committee email reflector.  This list is maintained by Listserv.