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

Re: [802SEC] Updated text for 'WG Membership & Meeting' P&P Revision



I support Tony's recommendations.

Carl 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sherman, Matthew J. (US SSA) 
> [mailto:matthew.sherman@BAESYSTEMS.COM] 
> Sent: Monday, November 14, 2005 2:16 PM
> To: STDS-802-SEC@listserv.ieee.org
> Subject: Re: [802SEC] Updated text for 'WG Membership & 
> Meeting' P&P Revision
> 
> If there are no objections by tomorrow evening, I will adopt Tony's
> recommendations.
> 
>  
> 
> Regards,
> 
>  
> 
> Mat 
> 
>  
> 
> Matthew Sherman, Ph.D. 
> Senior Member Technical Staff 
> BAE SYSTEMS, CNIR 
> Office: +1 973.633.6344 
> email: matthew.sherman@baesystems.com 
> 
>   _____  
> 
> From: Tony Jeffree [mailto:tony@jeffree.co.uk] 
> Sent: Monday, November 14, 2005 2:03 PM
> To: Sherman, Matthew J. (US SSA)
> Cc: STDS-802-SEC@listserv.ieee.org
> Subject: Re: [802SEC] Updated text for 'WG Membership & Meeting' P&P
> Revision
> 
>  
> 
> At 23:53 13/11/2005, Sherman, Matthew J. (US SSA) wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> Folks,
> 
>  
> 
> As requested, I've modified the existing 'WG Membership & 
> Meeting'  P&P
> Revision to be against the most recently approved P&P (which should be
> posted shortly).  No substantive changes have been made.
> 
>  
> 
> Best Regards,
> 
>  
> 
> Mat
> 
> 
> Mat - 
> 
> The wording I have a problem with is as follows:
> 
> "WG election procedures shall be defined within the WG P&P. Prior to
> their establishment, election procedures must be reviewed and approved
> by the EC before implementation."
> 
> The first sentence mandates the existence of a WG P&P document;
> otherwise, the "shall" cannot be complied with.
> 
> Yes, at some point, the SA will sick some set of model WG P&P on us;
> however, forcing all 802 WGs to establish P&P ahead of time, with the
> likelihood that the SA actions will cause us to re-work them later on,
> seems to be a gratuitous waste of all our time.
> 
> Also, I see absolutely no rational reason why we should have N
> differently worded sets of election procedures for officer 
> positions, so
> I can see no reason why this issue shouldn't be resolved by adding WG
> election procedures to the 802 P&P.
> 
> My proposal is, therefore:
> 
> 1) That both sentences in the above quoted text is removed from the
> existing P&P rules change; and
> 
> 2) A separate rules change be initiated (which I am happy to do if you
> wish) to add WG officer election procedures to the 802 P&P.
> 
> If either of those sentences stay in, I will vote against this change.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Regards,
> Tony
> 
> 
> ----------
> 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.