Re: [802SEC] +++10 Day EC Email Ballot (Closes no later than 22 January 2007)+++Motion regarding IEEE 802 reciprocal voting rights+++
I vote Disapprove, because:
(a) The motion is inappropriate according to the P&P. We don't have
the right to pass a motion that would specify that material "be
included in the next revision of the LMSC P&P". That's not the
procedure for changing the P&P.
(b) We can't by simple motion temporarily override the P&P, which is
what the motion is trying to do.
(c) Although you tried to avoid creating "a new class of voters",
this language would do so. The P&P do not specify a class of people
with WG voting rights; they specify the class of people who are WG
members. Voting is one right held by those members. This language
would create an additional class.
I generally like the idea you are proposing, but I remain concerned
that it would seriously impact quorum requirements in the smaller
groups. I would prefer a rule that would offer such reciprocal
membership not automatically but only upon request. I would support
the initiation of P&P change ballot along these lines.
P.S. I don't understand the labeling of the slide. In what sense is
this an "802.18 Motion to SEC"?
On Jan 12, 2007, at 10:12 AM, Michael Lynch wrote:
> Dear EC members,
> During the November Plenary meeting I presented to the EC a motion on
> reciprocal voting rights. There was discussion of the motion and some
> edits were suggested. It was decided that there should be further work
> on the motion. That motion, now modified, is being submitted here
> for EC
> During the revision to the original motion it was considered that
> with reciprocal voting rights would not be considered in determining
> quorums. After discussion that was dropped since it seemed to create a
> new class of voters.
> Next week's Joint Interim meeting will provide an opportunity for some
> of the EC to have face-to-face discussions of this motion and of
> we can discuss it here. Next Tuesday evening will be the RR-TAG hosted
> meeting to determine if IEEE 802 will submit an input to ITU-R WP8F on
> IMT requirements. It is possible that IMT requirements may be the
> of several IEEE 802 inputs to WP8F. If the work method involves
> developing the response(s) within individual TGs and bringing those
> results to the RR-TAG then having reciprocal voting rights should
> useful to that work.
> Motion: Moved by Mike Lynch, seconded by Steve Shellhammer
> The text of the motion is attached.
> Informative: This document informs ITU-R WP8F of a new project being
> started in IEEE.
> This ballot opens at midnight CT Friday 12 January and closes at 11:59
> p.m. CT Monday 22 January 2007.
> +1 972 814 4901 Mobile
> 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.