Re: [802SEC] Motion to return 802.20 to individual voting rights
Mark
Tony didn't suggest that the Working Group could change it themselves.
But they could pass a motion to request that the EC make the change.
There is a potential difference between the counts of a motion to
request that change and a straw poll - since it is common in straw polls
to allow people to vote regardless of their voting status.
Whether you do it as a motion making a request to the EC or as a straw
poll, I would like to see the results tallied under the current voting
rules.
Regards,
Pat
-----Original Message-----
From: ***** IEEE 802 Executive Committee List *****
[mailto:STDS-802-SEC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG] On Behalf Of Klerer, Mark
Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 12:47 PM
To: STDS-802-SEC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [802SEC] Motion to return 802.20 to individual voting
rights
EC Members
I will schedule a straw poll referendum on this issue during the July
session. However, I do want to point out that the method of balloting
and voting was mandated to 802.20 and it cannot be changed by the WG
itself.
Regards,
Mark
-----Original Message-----
From: ***** IEEE 802 Executive Committee List *****
[mailto:STDS-802-SEC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG] On Behalf Of Tony Jeffree
Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 3:15 PM
To: STDS-802-SEC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: Motion to return 802.20 to individual voting rights
James -
I believe reverting 802.20 to individual voting rights without giving
the WG a chance to make their views known is premature - they may
feel that the existing voting regime is working for them and they
want to keep it that way. I suggest we leave it up to the WG to make
a request of the EC in July if that is what they want.
Regards,
Tony
At 00:12 25/06/2008, James Gilb wrote:
>All
>
>Some corrections (thanks to Bob Grow).
>
>June 2006, SASB took action removing 802.20 officers
>December 2007 (not 2008) dissolving SASB oversight committee and
>returning all oversight to the EC.
>
>I verified that the UC-EC meet in San Francisco in closed session,
>July 16, 2007. The public minutes state that the following motion
>was approved:
>
>"Effective immediately, all votes and ballots in the 802.20 working
>group shall be conducted on the basis of entity affiliation, with
>one vote per entity. Entities and affiliation shall e as determined
>by the 802 EC 802.20 OC, based on members' declarations of their
>primary affiliation and other information available to the OC."
>
>It has been pointed out to me that we can do entity voting
>(apparently mixed voting was done away with, but is still listed in
>the IEEE SA web pages) under the rules defined by the SA. This may
>require some clarifications to the 802 EC P&P and OM as well as the
>802.20 P&P and OM.
>
>It was also pointed out that 802.20 did not use entity voting
>process, it used one based on voting blocs.
>
>If 802.20 (or any other group) wants to create a PAR with entity
>voting or to modify a current PAR so that it uses entity voting.
>
>The goal of the motion is to return 802.20 to its original state and
>to allow 802.20 members to determine the best course of action,
>including, if they wish, to switch to entity voting.
>
>James Gilb
>
>PS: Thanks for the responses from everyone that helped me to clarify
>the history and status of 802.20.
>
>James Gilb wrote:
>>All
>>I am looking for a second for this one. Paul N. will determine the
>>valid voting pool (all EC or UC-EC).
>>Rationale:
>>On 16 July 2007, the UC-EC voted to make voting for 802.20 to be
>>based on entity affiliation.
>>SASB returned oversight of the 802.20 WG to the UC-EC in December
2007.
>>Dec 2008 SASB minutes -- "Move to (1) disband the SASB Oversight
>>Committee, and (2) return oversight control to the 802 Executive
>>Committee with an offer of continuing support for situations where the
>>802 EC wishes to seek our help."
>>The above motion passed after reviewing the EC motion from November
2006
>>requesting that "the NC-EC be dissolved once the 802.20 standard is
>>approved by the SASB."
>>The 802.20 standard has been approved by the SASB.
>>Motion
>>-------------
>>Moved to return the 802.20 working group to individual voting at the
>>beginning of the July 2008 plenary meeting. Voting rights shall be
>>determined on historical attendance credits per the 802.20 P&P, and
>>superior rules.
>>--------------
>>Furthermore, the 802.20 rules and the 802 LMSC rules do not
>>explicitly deal with entity voting Working Groups (For example,
>>what constitutes an entity? In 802.20 sponsor ballot, various
>>individuals were grouped by the oversight committee into a single
entity vote.)
>>If we want to convert 802.20 to entity or mixed balloting group, we
>>should take to the time to write the P&P to support this. In the
>>mean time, I think it would be best to return 802.20 to where it was.
>>James Gilb
>>----------
>>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.