Re: [802SEC] Quorum and interims
Note that the same issues exist for LMSC plenary sessions. In fact,
some people do not consider the United States a convenient meeting
location given we are an international standards body, but we meet here
all the time anyway. So I really don't view this as a valid argument
given almost a year of advance notice.
That said, another possible resolution is approval of meeting locations
by the EC.
Matthew Sherman, Ph.D.
Senior Member Technical Staff
BAE SYSTEMS, CNIR
Office: +1 973.633.6344
From: Pat Thaler [mailto:email@example.com]
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2006 7:43 PM
To: Sherman, Matthew J. (US SSA); STDS-802-SEC@listserv.ieee.org
Subject: Quorum and interims
The one controversial rule change Friday was removing the quorum
requirement for a Working Group interim with sufficient notice (i.e. 11
months). We have people who are uncomfortable with this change, but also
have Working Groups that want some relief from the requirement. I would
like to kick off a discussion on where we go from here.
The main argument I heard against the change was that it would allow
violating the principle of openness by setting a Working Group interim
at a time or place that was difficult for most members to attend. Then a
potentially small group could make decisions for the Working Group.
If that is the concern, it could be addressed by having a requirement
that the time and place of the interim must be approved by the Working
Group at a plenary in addition to the requirement for advance notice in
order to qualify for waiving the quorum requirement.
Would some who voted against the rules change be able to accept it if
that was added?
If not, is there another adjustment that would resolve your concern?
This email is sent from the 802 Executive Committee email reflector. This list is maintained by Listserv.