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

Re: [802SEC] EC Membership and voting

Sorry to bring this topic back up.  But, I have just gotten back from
vacation and dug out from under more email messages than I though
possible to receive in only two weeks.

The problem I have with the philosophy you describe below is that it
works right up to the point where there is a contentious issue before
the EC and a single vote can determine passage or failure.  That
situation is not nearly as rare as it might sound.  In that situation,
hundreds of members are actually, not just theoretically,
disenfranchised.  Being able to speak on a motion that must be made by
another member of the EC (since the acting chair can't even make the
motion) is not nearly the same as being able make the motion itself and
then to vote on it.  

Why do you think that voting membership in the WGs/TAGs is such a big
deal that we have had to spend so much time on the text to gain and lose
that membership?  It is because simply being able to speak to the
assembly is not enough.

-----Original Message-----
From: Sherman, Matthew J. (US SSA)
Sent: Friday, September 30, 2005 8:19 PM
To: Bob O'Hara (boohara);
Subject: RE: [802SEC] EC Membership and voting


First the summary of my opinion:

I believe the P&P clearly prohibit a WG Vice Chair designated 'Acting
Chair' by the WG Chair from voting.  However, The WG Vice Chair could
have other important rights such as the right to sit at the table with
the rest of the EC, and fully participate in discussions. While I am
sympathetic to the idea that the WG is somehow disenfranchised in such a
situation, I don't think it is as serious an issue as it sounds, and
don't think we need any rules changes.

Now for the details: 

Please consider the extracts from the currently posted LMSC P&P shown
below. (I don't think the current P&P deviates substantially in this
regard though things may change in November.) 

These clearly state that no WG Chair (even though they have a
constituency and may run the WG) may vote until confirmed by the EC.
The passage even makes reference to the fact that 'ACTING' EC members
(and a Vice Chair of a WG representing the sitting Chair would have to
be considered as such) do not get to vote.  But they can sit at the
table, participate in discussion, and represent the views of the WG.

As such I would not say a WG is totally disenfranchised.  There are some
rights granted.  Assumedly in a room full of reasonable people, an
Acting Chair should be able to convince others at the table of actions
needed by the WG and they would be carried out (based on actions of
other EC members).  As long as enough non-acting WG chairs show up that
we have a quorum, the EC can function effectively. Since it is currently
rare for a WG chair to be absent for an extended period of time, I don't
think we need ever worry about the EC being unable to conduct business
due to unavailability of a large number of chairs. 



Extracts from Posted LMSC P&P

7.1.2 Membership


In addition, the Executive Committee includes the following non-voting

	Chairs of Hibernating Working Groups. 
	Appointed WG or TAG Chairs 
	Acting positions 
		(prior to the close of the plenary meeting 
		where appointed or elected)

All appointed and elected positions become effective at the end of the
plenary session where the appointment/ election occurs. Prior to the end
of that plenary session, such persons filling vacancies are considered
'Acting', and do not vote. Persons who are succeeding someone that
currently holds the position do not acquire any EC rights until the
close of the plenary session.


In case an election or appointment is not confirmed by the EC, the
person last holding the position will continue to serve until
confirmation of an election or appointment are achieved.

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

-----Original Message-----
From: Bob O'Hara (boohara) [mailto:boohara@CISCO.COM] 
Sent: Friday, September 30, 2005 6:56 PM
Subject: Re: [802SEC] EC Membership and voting


The "kerfuffle", as you say, and what is broken is that while Stuart is
on vacation, for the next six weeks, 500 voting members and an unholy
number of members that are not yet voting members of 802.11 have no
voice in the EC.  This essentially disenfranchises those members.

Why should that be allowed, when the possibility to deal with it simply
is available?  Why should a chair not be allowed to designate someone to
act in his/her stead, when the need arises?  The current LMSC P&P does
not prohibit that.

Presumably, we in the EC have confirmed that a vote was taken according
to required procedures when we confirm the election of a chair.  That
confirmation is not a confirmation that "joe is in the club (the EC)".
Joe is in the club because the election of his WG/TAG put him there.  It
is the WG/TAG that chooses who is in the EC, not us (well, except for
the appointed positions).

If that chair is operating with the consent of the WG and the chair
designates someone to proxy for him for a reason and for a temporary
period, who are we to say the WG and chair cannot do that?

When a chair "passes the gavel" during a meeting, the person now holding
that gavel is the chair.  How is this different?

-----Original Message-----
From: Paul Nikolich [mailto:paul.nikolich@ATT.NET] 
Sent: Friday, September 30, 2005 3:37 PM
Subject: [802SEC] EC Membership and voting

Dear EC members,

The right to cast an EC vote is held by specific EC members is defined
the P&P.  Gaining EC membership is defined in the P&P.

I don't understand the kerfuffle surrounding this topic.  In my view
is broken in the P&P on this topic--let's not try to fix it.


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Pat Thaler" <pat_thaler@AGILENT.COM>
To: <>
Sent: Friday, September 30, 2005 4:39 PM
Subject: Re: [802SEC] EC Membership and voting

> And here is the message with my view on the subject:
> The rules are clear. The voting position on the Exec belongs to the 
> Working Group chair (once confirmed or appointed).
> If you want to change that, it would require a rules change. I would
> against such a rules change. I think consistency/continuity in our 
> membership is important. If it was officially stated that the vote
> be used by a vice chair in place of the chair, I'm concerned that
> might fairly regularly send their vice chair to the EC in their place 
> which would lose continuity.
> With the rules as they are, we get very good Working Group Chair 
> attendance.
> By the way, I also think that if we must continue this discussion, it 
> should move to the EC reflector where it is visible. We have drifted
> off the contract matters that required private discussion.
> Regards,
> Pat
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bob O'Hara (boohara) [mailto:boohara@CISCO.COM]
> Sent: Friday, September 30, 2005 1:32 PM
> To:
> Subject: [802SEC] EC Membership and voting
> Taking this to the reflector for more open discussion of the issue.
> This is a very important issue and needs to be discussed.  I don't
> that precedent is sufficient to "decide" this matter.
> I disagree with all that have said that membership on the EC is held
> an individual.  It is not.  Membership in 802 is a right held by
> individual.  Membership on the EC is held by a position.  No
> is selected by any means for membership on the EC.  Individual 802
> members are selected for a position, either by their WG/TAG or by
> confirmation of an appointment by the LMSC chair.  It is the position
> that holds the voting right on the EC, not the individual.  Clause
> in the P&P is very clear on this point.
> A simple example will serve to illustrate this.  I am currently the
> Recording Secretary and able to vote in the EC.  If I were to resign
> that position, even though I am still an individual member of 802 and
> 802.11, I would no longer be able to vote in the EC.  The confirmation
> of my appointment to the position of Recording Secretary made me able
> vote, not the fact that I, as an individual, was confirmed as an
> abstract "member of the EC".
> The P&P discuss "succession" in only one specific case, when an
> or appointment is not confirmed by the EC.  It does not apply to this
> situation.
> If a WG/TAG chair has their own P&P allow them the power to appoint
> someone to act in their absence or incapacity and our P&P are silent
> the topic, is that appointed person now the "chair" for all intents
> purposes under our P&P?
> I would say we are in an ambiguous situation.  Precedent may make one
> feel comfortable.  But, it is not a defense for an appeal and it is
> sufficient to close this issue.
> Personally, I think that an elected chair should be able to have their
> WG/TAG represented on the EC in their absence or incapacity.  Why
> we want anything different?  Do we really want to silence a WG of more
> than 500 voting members, simply because the chair is on vacation?
> -Bob
> Bob O'Hara
> Cisco Systems - WNBU
> Phone:  +1 408 853 5513
> Mobile: +1 408 218 4025
> ----------
> This email is sent from the 802 Executive Committee email reflector.
> list is maintained by Listserv.
> ----------
> This email is sent from the 802 Executive Committee email reflector.
> list is maintained by Listserv. 

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

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

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