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

Re: [802SEC] 802.20 affirmation



Title: Message
Bob,
 
I did not mean to indicate the candidates had zero experience in 802.  Howver, you are correct that the statement reads that way.  I modify my statement as follows: "In my view, the decision was made because the candidates were not qualified due to a lack of sufficient experience in 802."
 
--Paul
 
----- Original Message -----
From: Bob O'Hara
Sent: Saturday, March 15, 2003 4:07 PM
Subject: RE: [802SEC] 802.20 affirmation

I'm sorry Paul, but that point was never made during the meeting and can't be assumed to be part of anyone's decision yesterday.  I certainly don't agree with it.  I believe that the decision was made for entirely unsupportable reasons.  The only point that was made regarding the individuals elected by 802.20 was that they had not participated in the study group, not that they had no experience in 802.  Certainly, the elected chair of 802.20 had previous experience in 802 and extensive experience in other standards-making organizations.  Your position is not a reflection of the facts.
 
Regarding the decision of the SEC not to affirm the elections of 802.20, there was no evidence presented of any irregular procedures, failure to follow published procedures, or irregularity in the voting.  My position, as I stated at the SEC meeting, is that all procedures were followed scrupulously and the elections, which I observed as an SEC member, were without protest by any person present at the 802.20 meeting.  As far as I can tell, the decision not to affirm was made on the unsupported allegations of two individual participants in 802.20.  Are we prepared to invalidate every other working group decision that requires SEC affirmation with the same level of evidence, i.e., two allegations unsupported by any evidence?
 
Indeed, no concrete guidance was provided to the appointed interim chair of 802.20 on how not to wind up in exactly the same situation when the next elections are held.  Is the SEC prepared to affirm the elections, if the same candidates are nominated and elected at the July meeting?  Is a single 802 meeting experience enough?  If not, where is it written in our Policies and Procedures (formerly our Rules) that you have to have some number of meetings under your belt before you can become an officer of a working group?
 
I can't support the opinion you offered as to why the election of the officers was not affirmed by the SEC.  If asked, I will offer my own, quite different, opinion.

 -Bob O'Hara
 

-----Original Message-----
From: Paul Nikolich [mailto:paul.nikolich@att.net]
Sent: Saturday, March 15, 2003 11:55 AM
To: IEEE802
Subject: [802SEC] 802.20 affirmation

Dear SEC,
 
People will want to know why the SEC did not affirm the 802.20 officer candidates presented to at the closing plenary meeting.  I have already had two inquiries.  In my view, the decision was made because the candidates were not qualified due to lack of experience in 802.
 
Regards,
 
--Paul Nikolich