Re: [802SEC] Interpretation of current P&P
Colleagues, I agree with Bob's observations on this, and believe that
Tony is good to go for at least one more term. And yes, the P&P
language needs to be improved.
Thanx, Buzz
Dr. Everett O. (Buzz) Rigsbee
Boeing IT
PO Box 3707, M/S: 7M-FM
Seattle, WA 98124-2207
Ph: (425) 373-8960 Fx: (425) 865-7960
Cell: (425) 417-1022
everett.o.rigsbee@boeing.com
-----Original Message-----
From: Bob O'Hara (boohara) [mailto:boohara@CISCO.COM]
Sent: Monday, October 29, 2007 1:41 PM
To: STDS-802-SEC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [802SEC] Interpretation of current P&P
I believe that the intent of the policy is to require WG approval for a
chair to serve more than 10 years, i.e, to be elected more than five
times or to be appointed to replace an elected chair and then be elected
more than four times. I think the phrase "has served ... more than
eight years" is the key to determining this meaning. The use of past
tense seems to allow the chair to be elected to five terms or to serve
out a partial term after being appointed and then be elected to four
more terms. If the intent was to limit a chair to no more than four
complete terms, the text could easily have said that.
I agree with Carl that the text can be improved to make this meaning
clearer.
If Tony has been elected four times and you accept my reasoning above, I
think there is not a need for the WG to get involved in this mess at
this time.
-Bob
-----Original Message-----
From: ***** IEEE 802 Executive Committee List *****
[mailto:STDS-802-SEC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG] On Behalf Of Carl R. Stevenson
Sent: Monday, October 29, 2007 11:23 AM
To: STDS-802-SEC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [802SEC] Interpretation of current P&P
Dear all,
While the words may not say *exactly* that, I concur with Roger's
interpretation of the intent of our provision as meaning "four two year
terms" (or at least the better part of the span of 4 March to
March_plus_2_years terms ... I don't think that it was ever intended
that a
matter a few weeks would make a difference)
Having said that, I want to make it clear that I am not suggesting that
Tony
should be forced from office, that I respect his service, and that I
strongly suspect that if he wishes to continue he would likely get his
WG's
endorsement to do so ...
Matt: ... I think we should clarify this in a future P&P revision.
Regards,
Carl
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-stds-802-sec@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
> [mailto:owner-stds-802-sec@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG] On Behalf Of
> Roger B. Marks
> Sent: Monday, October 29, 2007 1:20 PM
> To: Tony Jeffree
> Cc: STDS-802-SEC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
> Subject: Re: [802SEC] Interpretation of current P&P
>
> Tony,
>
> I think that the intent of "eight years" is "four two-year terms".
>
> On the other hand, if we take the "eight years" literally, then I
> think we ought to look at the calendar. According to my records, the
> March 2000 session ended on 9 March and the March 2008 session opens
> on 17 March.
>
> Roger
>
>
> On Oct 29, 2007, at 10:59 AM, Tony Jeffree wrote:
>
> > I have a question for clarification of the current P&P with regard
> > to the wording in 7.2.2. It states:
> >
> > "An individual who has served as Chair or Vice Chair of a given WG
> > for a total of more than
> > eight years in that office may not run for election to that office
> > again, unless the question of
> > allowing that individual to run for election again is
> approved by a
> > 75% vote of the WG one
> > plenary in advance of that election."
> >
> > I am now in my 8th year as 802.1 Chair, having first been
> appointed
> > Chair at the end of the March 2000 Plenary session. So when the
> > elections are run in March 2008, I will have been Chair for not
> > quite 8 years, as the appointment occurs at the end of the session
> > (see 7.1.2). I therefore interpret the above as meaning that I
> > don't need a 75% approval vote of my WG in November to allow me to
> > run for re-election in March. Is my interpretation correct?
> >
> > 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.
>
----------
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.