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

Re: [802SEC] +++10 Day Ballot+++Opens 07Marc Closes 17 March


I believe that I have one more question to add to the mix.
That is, when is affiliation pinned to the individual who is participating 
in the ballot?

There are several obvious answers, some of them obviously bad.
   1) When the balloting group is formed and unchangeable for the life of 
the PAR
      (Obviously bad, I believe that is the problem we are wrestling with now)
   2) When the balloting group is formed, option of the entity to retain 
for life of the PAR
      (Seems like a bad idea, opportunity for gaming)
   3) Snapshot at each opening of each ballot
      (Reasonable, but still gameable)
   4) Snapshot at each close of each ballot
      (Seems most reasonable to me, nuisance to administer)
   5) Snapshot at close of initial ballot only
      (Not too bad but potentially has some problems)

I believe that we are talking about #s 3 & 4
We need to be exceedingly crisp in the final definition


At 07:44 PM 3/10/2008 , Pat Thaler wrote:
>I'm confused by some aspects of this procedure.
>There is currently a recirculation ballot in progress that will close
>before the procedure is approved. Is the intent for it to apply to the
>recirculation in progress?
>The request can be made by an individual A in the ballot pool regarding
>the assignment of individual B in the ballot pool. I would think in that
>case, individual B should be informed of the request and have a chance
>to respond, but the procedure doesn't say anything regarding this.
>Perhaps the intent is to cover this under the investigation and
>consideration by the OC, but I think it should be explicit.
>The text appears to cover moving an individual from one current bloc to
>another current bloc. Is that the only type of move permitted? What if
>someone changes employment to an entity that isn't currently represented
>in the 802.20 sponsor ballot pool?
>If a move is from or to the consultant/independent bloc, who qualifies
>as a representative for the bloc?
>-----Original Message-----
>From: ***** IEEE 802 Executive Committee List *****
>[mailto:STDS-802-SEC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG] On Behalf Of
>Sent: Friday, March 07, 2008 2:08 PM
>Subject: [802SEC] +++10 Day Ballot+++Opens 07Marc Closes 17 March
>Dear EC Members,
>The 802 Chair, Paul Nikolich, has delegated the conduct of the following
>motion via 802 EC email ballot to me, Arnie Greenspan.
>Moved: The Unconflicted 802 EC members approve the attached
>Procedure, to be used in the event there is a request for a change to an
>individuals block assignment during the 802.20 Sponsor ballot.
>Opens: 07 MAR 2008; Closes 17 MAR2008
>Mover: Arnie Greenspan
>Seconder: Buzz Rigsbee
>Unconflicted EC (UC EC) members regarding 802.20 WG matters are eligible
>to cast a ballot on this issue.
>UC EC Voters:
>CH Paul Nikolich
>ES Buzz Rigsbee
>RS Bob O'Hara
>TR John Hawkins
>01 Tony Jeffree
>15 Bob Heile
>17 John  Lemon
>18 Mike Lynch
>20 Arnie Greenspan
>ME Geoff Thompson       non-voting
>EC members not eligible to vote:
>V1 Mat Sherman
>V2 Pat Thaler
>03 Bob Grow
>11 Stuart Kerry
>16 Roger Marks
>19 Steve Shellhammer
>21 Vivek Gupta
>22 Carl Stevenson
>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.