| Thread Links | Date Links | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thread Prev | Thread Next | Thread Index | Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index |
|
P1583 -
Unless Dr. Corry's challenge can be substantially rebutted,
I would agree: the initial postings to the private web page were great strides
in the right direction, but it's not clear that they were followed
through.
-- From: alkolwicz [mailto:alkolwicz@qwest.net] Sent: Saturday, October 02, 2004 3:27 PM To: stds-1583@ieee.org Subject: RE: Request for postponement of October 5th teleconference Herb, I join Dr. Corry in
his recommendation that we delay Tuesday’s meeting until a complete rough draft
of the standard has been posted for
at least two weeks. It does not make
good sense to proceed with the meeting just to give the appearance of making
progress. This is too important. Yours, Al
Kolwicz From: Dr.
Charles E. Corry [mailto:ccorry@ejfi.org] I would suggest that the P1583
teleconference currently scheduled to commence at 10 AM CDT on October 5th be
postponed until a complete draft of the voting equipment standard has been made
available and has been posted for at least two weeks, though 30 days to review
would be in conformance with our rules. In justification I note the
following: 1. No new information on the draft standard has been
posted since September 18-19. 2. Draft version 5.3 posted on September 18th is missing
some 100 pages that were present in version 5.0 for the last ballot. I am quite
uncertain at present what has been omitted and what added in draft version
5.3. I certainly do not have the time to play detective to find out for
myself. 3. No complete version of the standards is currently
available. Even if a complete version were made available today it would be
impossible for most committee members to review it prior to next Tuesday in any
meaningful fashion. 4. I submitted some 220 comments during the ballot
on v. 5, a number of which were in regard to comments I had made about version 4
that had been adopted but not incorporated in v 5. It will take me at least two
weeks of diligent effort to review the response to all of my comments once I
have a complete draft available. That will certainly not occur before October
5th. 5. Having nothing before me to review I would be left
without any option but to once again vote no on any motion that these standards
be sent to ballot. Having submitted numerous comments on every draft, including
Brit William's initial one three years ago, I am as eager as anyone to
finalize the first edition of these standards. But I cannot, in good conscience,
vote to proceed until I have had a reasonable amount of time to review what we
propose to ballot on. 6. The published agenda for the October 5th meeting has
two basic action items. One is an update on status of the draft standard and
that can certainly be accomplished easier and more conveniently via email.
Secondly, as noted above, without a draft standard and time to review it, there
is little purpose in putting forth a motion to take a nebulous document to
ballot. Thus, there is currently no reason for a formal
meeting. 7. The October 5th meeting can be delayed with no
logistical problems. As it is simply a teleconference, no change in airline or
hotel reservations are required if the meeting is rescheduled. Therefore, the
October 5th meeting can be postponed without significant inconvenience to P1583
members. On a personal note, to proceed now
has the flavor of being sold "vaporware." As a research manager of long
experience I find that approach quite objectionable and insulting. No matter
what external time constraints may exist, e.g., EAC, we only make fools of
ourselves to attempt to push through incomplete and unreviewed standards that
will serve no one well, least of all American
citizens. Therefore, I see a rescheduling of
the October 5th teleconference as being in all of our best
interests. Charles E. Corry,
Ph.D., F.G.S.A. President, Equal Justice
Foundation http://www.ejfi.org/ Curriculum vitae:
http://www.marquiswhoswho.net/charleselmocorry/Default.aspx
|